Present: Merulla (out 5 x for 15 min); Kelly (out 1x for 13 min); Pearson; Ferguson (out 2 x for 13 min); Bratina; Whitehead (out 1x for 3 min).

Absent: Mitchell and McHattie

Also present: Samson, Bruckler, Morelli, Di Ianni (from 10:47 ) and Collins (from 11:04 )

Media: McGuinness (Spectator), Mann (CHML), Werner ( Brabant )

CATCH: Don

5.1  AdministrativeAmendment to the Former City of Stoney Creek Official Plan (PED05057(a)) (Ward9)
Bruckler asked that this be deferred for more info. This is Paletta property. Bruckler concerns about traffic issues. Approved.

5.2 Delegation of Council Consent to Staff for Alterations to Designated Property Under the Ontario Heritage Act (PED05096) (City Wide)
On Samson's request this was referred back and will be brought forward in mid-November after Samson has an opportunity to meet with the Cross-Melville District Advisory Committee.

5.3 HeritagePermit Application (HP2005-016) Under Part IV ofthe

5.4 MainWest Business Improvement Area (B.I.A.)

5.5  DemolitionPermit - 209 Wellington Street North (PED05129) (Ward2)

Whitehead asked that permits 5.5 to 5.10 be amended to require a building permit before demolition was okayed. Kelly asked if staff agreed with this, noting that on a previous occasion this had been done inappropriately. Staff noted that 5.9 and 5.10 were for buildings located on land zoned industrial where the owner wanted to remove them to improve property appearance. Morelli arrived during this discussion and agreed that these should go ahead. A motion was passed to change 5.5 to 5.8. Pearson asked to be recorded as opposed. Remainder of consent items were adopted without discussion.

5.6 Demolition Permit - 61 Robins Avenue (PED05130) (Ward 4)

5.7 Demolition Permit - 81 Harmony Avenue (PED05131) (Ward 4)

5.8 DemolitionPermit - 175 Kensington Avenue North (PED05132) (Ward3)

5.9 Demolition Permit - 208 Gage Avenue North (PED05133) (Ward 3)

5.10 Demolition Permit - 204 Gage Avenue North (PED05134) (Ward 3)

5.11 Declaration of Surplus Property Located at the Rear of 46 Milkyway Drive, Hamilton (PED05135) (Ward 6)

5.12 Licensing & Property Standards Operational Review Sub-committee Report 05-001

6.1 Applicationfor a Change in Zoning for Lands Located at 894 Golf Links Road (Ancaster)(PED05123) (Ward 12)
"Zoning Application ZAC-05-57, Elona and Gunther Schneider, owners , for a change in zoning from the Agricultural "A" Zone to the Residential Multiple "RM4" Zone, Modified (Block 1) to recognize the existing single detached dwelling and to permit block townhouse dwellings, and to the Residential Multiple "RM4" Zone, Modified, (Block 2) to permit either block townhouse dwellings or single detached dwellings for lands located at 894 Golf Links Road.."

Whitehead asked if committee wanted to hear the staff report, even after determining that there was a member of the public who wished to speak to the item. Committee agreed to hear the report. Ferguson noted staff referred to maybe asking for a tree preservation plan. Ferguson asked that it be required and that was agreed to by staff. Fred Brown addressed the committee. He wrote a letter which is available in the staff report. He wanted immediate moving forward on converting adjacent properties to townhouses to avoid area going commercial. Also concerned about traffic that will exit "directly in front of my property and my neighbours on the corner". Wants exits onto Golf Links Road in addition to the one onto Londonderry . No questions from committee members to Mr. Brown. Agent Ed Fothergill spoke to committee and opposed exit onto Golf Links. No questions from committee. Ferguson asked about other properties access to Golf Links, and staff says there is from the townhouse development to the west. Motion moved by Ferguson , seconded by Pearson. Carried.

6.2 Application for a Change in Zoning for the Property Located at 480 Jones Road (Stoney Creek) (PED05124) (Ward 11)

No public delegations. Committee waives staff presentation. Pearson asks clairifying question and then moves the motion. Seconded by Kelly. Carried with no discussion.

6.3 Item incorrectly listed in agenda. Actual title is: Applications to Amend theAncaster Official Plan and Zoning By-law No. 87-57, 134 Wilson Street East (Ancaster) (PED05126) (Ward 12) http://www.myhamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/AABC3879
-4E5B-4EF7-B9F2-A47E007E7AA3/0/Oct04PED05126.pdf

"Official Plan Application OPA-05-07, by Dr. Michael Mogavero, owner, to add a site-specific policy to the Ancaster Official Plan to permit an animal hospital with no outside runs and a dwelling unit within the existing building, for lands located at 134 Wilson Street East (former Town of Ancaster).."

Member of the public living adjacent to the property to the east made a number of detailed recommendations related to conditions of implementation. These were described by Ferguson as site plan amendments and he supported the requests, although it was noted that extension of the fence toward the street may not be permitted because of sightline requirements. Morelli noted that the applicant had done something very similar in his ward and everyone was very happy about the implementation.

14 minutes on this item.

7.1  Parking Issues in Downtown Hamilton (PED05019/SPH05038) (Wards 1, 2 & 3) - Referred from Planning and Economic Development Committee on August 3, 2004 and City Council on January 26, 2005

Staff investigation found 42 out of 45 cities studied used parking meters in downtown and there was no evidence that getting rid of them was a good thing for downtown. However, the staff report recommends free parking in downtown on Saturdays and continuation of free one-hour parking at the York Parkade for the benefit of the Farmers' Market. Report responds to requests by market, downtown BIA and councillor Ferguson . Market had suggested movement exists across North America to remove parking meters from downtowns.

Sixteen minute staff report by Marty Hazell and Paul Buckle. Hazell: ".pleased to report that contrary to recent reports we have unanimous support from all the major downtown stakeholders [a critical letter appeared in today's Spectator from Westdale BIA representative]" including Farmer's Market and BIAs. "There have been some concerns about long term abuse of parking on Saturdays" Staff will work with them. "We need to get a better understanding of so-called free parking. In fact, there is no such thing. There are costs associated with operating every on or off-street parking facility whether its in a mall or a municipal facility. We have to pay for hydro, pay for lines, sweep them. Everybody pays. At a mall they buy the property. They tax it and that's in the rent charged to the store. So there is no such thing as free parking. In the municipal context it's either user pay or levy subsidized. And in Hamilton we've adopted the user pay philosophy." Parking authority is self-sustaining and pays for its operations and capital projects and generates a surplus to defray taxes, "and also pays about $1 million annually in payments in lieu of property taxes. When we start to talk about free parking, any movement in that direction would have some possibly serious financial implications for the taxpayers. Free parking contradicts the downtown transportation master plan efforts to encourage other modes of transportation. And you'll see that our research has established that there's no quantifiable returns on our investment if we were to go to any type of free parking program. In fact there are a number of disbenefits. There's issues of employees parking on the street and taking up all the customer parking. There's a negative financial impact to private parking operators, so they're very concerned about what goes on." Notes other recent initiatives in the downtown to improve downtown parking. "We've increased the number of parking meters from 200 to 500 - a 150% increase in the number of meters. . And because we increased the number of meters, it allowed us, without any financial consequences, to reduce the hourly parking rate from a dollar per hour to 50 cents per hour. . The meters are all programmed to provide an additional 10 minutes of grace time on every meter. . Most meters only operate on Thursday to 6 pm ." Paul Buckle provided details of the investigation of parking in other cities (see the staff report). . Kitchener example where they've removed the meters from their downtown. Took out 10% of downtown meters and replaced them with a two hour time limit. "They were forced to implement a five-hour re-parking prohibition. What this means is if you park downtown at say 11 oclock. You buy a pair of pants, you take them home, and find they don't fit. You can't come back that day. You can't come back until five hours after you initially parked which means the business is closed. You have to wait until tomorrow to change the pair of pants. Kitchener 's director of planning identified free parking as only one of many factors that contributed to the downtown renewal. And the main point that we'd like to make about Kitchener is their parking program costs them annually $600,000 a year - and that's for 10% free parking in the downtown. Brantford is another example. They have 86,000 population. They removed 218 meters in the downtown in 1995 and another 256 meters in the downtown in 2000. As of 2001 there was no improvement to the 80% commercial vacancy rate that was observed. In 2002 they started a number of other programs which are generating a recovery in the downtown. These have to do with re-investment programs and some brownfield development. And ironically as a result of these programs, they are now starting to see some recovery in the downtown and as a result are having to look at putting in meters to regulate the parking that's going on down there. SO the research essentially summarizes this. Parking meters are found to be the industry standard across North America . There's no evidence to indicate a significant return on investment when meters are removed from the downtown, based on both the case studies and our conversations with the 45 municipalities that we surveyed. There's no evidence to prove the success of downtown renewal program was dependent upon or directly attributable to free parking. There are a lot of other programs that are more likely to cause a turnaround in a downtown area. And there's no evidence to suggest a North American trend to removing meters. In fact it's the exact opposite. The trend is to install meters. ." Says time limit parking requires twice the enforcement staff as parking meters. . "The employees who receive permits to park are going to park on the street in front of their businessess and the customers are not going to be able to go there. . Sign erection and maintenance costs are going to adversely affect our budget and consequently the tax levy. visual pollution and will create confusion in the minds of motorists. And customers complaining about receiving parking tickets - they're still going to get parking tickets because they're not going to pay attention to the time limits either. It won't matter what regulation you've got. If you're disinclined to obey one regulation you're disinclined to obey any regulation. . If we put free time limit parking in the downtown on a seven-day-a-week basis or a six-day-a-week basis, it will definitely have a detrimental impact on private parking lot operators who've already indicated their objection. They don't like the idea of daily free parking in the downtown core. When we look at the BIA proposal which included a time limit in addition to the meters, again we have the same problem with regard to enforcement. It's going to require two or three times the manpower to enforce a time limit in addition to a parking meter as it requires to enforce parking meters alone. . combining the regulation is going to increase motorists' confusion . Gross revenue for the city for on-street parking meters is in the order of $1,216,000. The cost to collect that is about $310,000 a year - now this is city-wide. Net revenue is just short of a million dollars, about $900,000. Net revenue for downtown is estimated to be about half of that - about $500,000 in the downtown." Says replacement will still mean most of the costs remain - enforcement, maintenance, signs, property damage. "Meters pay for themselves. Signs do not. So replacing the meters with signs will likely result in about a $500,000 per annum loss ."

Marty Hazell continues: "We wanted to take a comprehensive approach to parking across the downtown rather than deal with different portions of downtown as suggested by the market and the BIA. We tried to take a holistic approach. And the first issue we dealt with was the parking program in the York Parkade . concerns from many that 1-hour parking is limited in scope, it doesn't serve enough of the downtown. It gets people downtown, keeps them for an hour and then they leave. And we want to get people downtown and keep them there. We don't want to drive them away in an hour. .looked at trying to provide free parking in all of the downtown on Saturdays to benefit the greater number of businesses on the busiest shopping day of the week. Rather than getting in your car and drive to the mall, maybe you'll get in your car and drive downtown if it's free on Saturdays. You won't have to compete with the employees taking up allthe parking on Saturdays because the degree of employee parking on Saturday is not as great. And we had to look at how we could afford that. So we looked at trading off the free parking in York Parkade, the one-hour free parking, the limited program, using the revenues generated if we cancelled that program to fund free parking across the community improvement area all day on Saturdays all year long. Just a note about the York Boulevard Parkade program. It is rather obsolete, at least the intention of it was. It was originally recommended as a one year program in August of 1997 by city council. It was in exchange for a commitment from the T Eaton Company for a ten year guarantee that they would stay downtown. Well Eaton's is long gone and we're still spending about $200,000 a year in lost revenues to fund that program. The York Parkade only serves businesses within a 150 metre radius, or a reasonable walking distance of that facility. And it only provides free parking for one hour. And we've heard stories of people run in, do their business, and leave, and we want to keep people downtown . So rather than pull the rug out from under the farmers market. They were concerned that while they would like some free parking, they did not want to lose the one hour parking in the free parkade. We are recommending continued funding of the one hour parking in the free parkade, at least on an interim basis, until a market analysis can be completed. The cultural services which administers the market has funds to do a complete market analysis of the farmers market and hopefully they'll be able to come back to you and outline the strengths and weaknesses of the market. You can determine what level of funding should be applied to the market and where it should be funded rather than just keep funding the parkade and its . helping a number of businesses . council consider allocating $200,000 in the 2006 budget to provide interim funding of the York Boulevard parkade one-hour free parking. And that would be a Cultural Services inititive on the levy, and you can make a decision in your overall decisions about the market, whether you want to continue that, if it's a good investment, or see some change, or it can be eliminated." Explains that they would move ahead with free parking on Saturdays, contingent on funding being provided to the parking authority for the York Boulevard Parkade costs. "We have all the stakeholders saying this is a good move forward. It's not perfect but it's a real tough issue to get everybody together and we're pleased that they've all endorsed the recommendations as is . We're also recommending that we work with the various stakeholders in developing a marketing strategy if we decide to bill this free parking on Saturdays, and . we'll work with them all to address any of their concerns about long term abuse of parking on Saturdays."

Merulla thanks staff for "incredibly informative presentation" and says he will move the staff recommendation.

Ferguson says "job well done". Asks about tradeoff with parkade. Hazell : ".we need about $200,000 to fund all-day parking on Saturdays for the rest of the CIP, and were recommending trading that off for the parkade." Ferguson then asks Kathy Drewitt [downtown BIA coordinator] and Mary Pocius [international village coordinator] who are sitting in the gallery for a "one word answer" - "will you approach the businesses in your respective areas and will they promise" to not have their staff using the free parking on the street. Both say 'yes'. Ferguson notes that Rock Island is part of a "quad city" "sort of like Cambridge " so it's "hard to take Rock Island in isolation". Staff say they were just responding to farmers market arguments about Rock Island alone and that farmers market also didn't look at the other three municipalities. Ferguson says he'll report the recommendation. "Good stuff".

Pearson : ".excellent presentation and inforamtion. I'm very pleased that this is a very very thorough review of, you know, of things that can do and being done as a comparative" Thanks everyone involved. "I will support the recommendation".

Bratina : "This is a remarkable piece of work and I've asked our parking staff to condense it into a brochure, which they did, because I don't know how many squabbles I've had with business areas and so on about the concept of free parking. So now I have a couple of documents, this one and the smaller one and say, 'read that and then ask me the questions or make a comment. And once people understand what's in this information, it changes the whole tone of the conversation. It's a brilliant piece of work and I'm proud to have had very little input into it except to suggest that we publish it and make it available to the public." Endorses the recommendations.

Whitehead : ".commend. I know it's very difficult because you have many different interests when you pull this kind of a report together. I do have some concerns. . You make it absolutely clear that free parking doesn't work, that it's actually counterproductive, and then . you recommend free parking on Saturdays. That's a contradiction in itself within your own report based on your own findings . second thing . it's pretty clear that the original premise of York Boulevard parking was tied in to the Eaton's Centre, not the market specifically. . commend you . trying to achieve a balance . want to recognize that right up front. But now I'm looking at it from the perspective of the broader taxpayer. . very supportive of the broader program [downtown free parking] which assists many other merchants than the very narrow area that the York Boulevard assisted." Asks how long to get the marketing study done, and what the process will be. Ron Marini [downtown coordinator]: "The marketing study will be done through Anna Bradford's office, and it's my understanding that it will probably be available come the spring. There's been some delays in getting the marketing study. And you're quite correct. We're recommending it be included for budget consideration, so at least for 2006 the program for the parkade will continue. And it will be on the basis of the recommendations following from the marketing study that council will then be faced with recommendations about whether it should consider continuing the parkade program as an incentive for the market, or to discontinue it. . We also recognize, and as you quite correctly pointed out, in the preparation of the report there was a number of balances that had to be struck, obviously, and of course one of them was to acknowledge in all our renewal efforts one of our principal selling points for the downtown is having that market available for folks that are moving into the downtown. So we didn't want to . pull the plug out of the market operators. And so now we're giving them due notice and doing an appropriate assessment to determine if it should be continued or to be curtailed after 2006." Whitehead asks for budget implications. Answer is "about $200,000 annually in lost revenue" Whiteheads says "that's where the problem is from my perspective. I believe that everything you've put in this report is excellent, and I think that we need to do an analysis of free parking every Saturday . see what the impacts are . and after the analysis, I think we need to close that by . the part I can't support at this point [appears to refer to the parkade free parking] . my concern is that we have many merchants that pay full taxes and we're broadening the area with regards to free parking on Saturday and we're going to continue subsidizing the market to some degree . that only benefits a very small area.."

Bratina : "Mr Chair, we have a historic responsibility to the market as a city and as a city council. We really haven't been maintaining, we've had to find infrastructure money to bring that market to the level that it should be. The land was originally deeded to the city in perpetuity, and the city's responsibility is to provide a space for a market. So you can't just separate it out and say 'why are we helping this group of people'. You have to understand that this is a historic part of the city. We're making a very tough request on the market operators, but they're willing to go along with it, which is to say, when we do a study on this market, it may change. But we need to look after all the assets in order to ensure that it goes on and becomes an even greater asset to the city of Hamilton . So, Mr Chair, I wish you'd reconsider that position that you stated, because we have a responsibility to sustain that market. Those market operators have told us that they can't continue on unless they have the assurance of the parking situation as it has been so far. Whether it's fair or not will be determined by the market study. And I think this throws a bit of a monkey wrench into the whole thing if we start separating it off and open a big discussion of whether or not these people deserve some sort of a city subsidy. It is our market and it is our responsibility to maintain it. So that is my comment."

DiIanni : "Well, I would be repeating some of the things that the previous speaker has indicated. I therefore just want to cut to the chase and say that I'm supportive of the report."

Whitehead argues that the free parking on Saturdays "also impacts on the market, does it not, in a positive way?" Not just the parkade now, but all the meters in that area would be free in the area too. Bratina responds "I suggest that you meet with the market operators before you carry on with that. It's one thing to sit back and look at numbers on a piece of paper, and it's another thing to talk to human beings and businessmen who every day of their lives are involved with that area. This is not numbers of a piece of paper. This is a lifestyle for market stallholders and their customers. And I really urge you to look into it a little deeper. Because we all have spent a heck of a lot of time going through this process, and I don't want to see it dismissed on the basis of somebody looking at numbers and saying 'what are we paying that for?'."

Kelly : "I would submit that we're getting ahead of ourselves. Staff have already said that they're going to do a market study . in my first term of council I sat on the farmers market subcommittee and had my eyes opened to some of the problems. and of course a lot of the history to it. And there were market studies done at that time on what the impact that the market has, and I would suggest if we want to have a full debate on that, we wait until staff finish that report a year from now. At this point I would suggest it's a good news story for the downtown and to enhance downtown businesses on Saturday's and hopefully right through the year, and I'll be supportive of this. The caveat . and we saw some letters to the editor which were alluded to earlier, is that some of the other BIAs may have some concerns. Not so much about the parking concerns. For instance on Concession Street in my area, they don't want the free parking. Every Christmas when we do the free parking, Concession Street is excluded from that because they don't want it for the same reason that staff already pointed out. They want the turnover. They want people to do their shopping, move, go someplace else, and let somebody else come in here. And it's worked very effectively. But I think what we're going to have to do is be sensitive to some of the other needs of the other BIAs as we go forward, whether it's streetscape improvements, parking, whatever the case may be. Having said that, and represented Concession Street , and Sam of course with Ottawa Street and Barton Street , we also understand the priorities of the downtown. And I think that everybody does that too. And in that context this is a very positive move and I'll be supporting it."

Moved by Merulla, seconded by Kelly. Ferguson asks how staff are going to measure the results. Marini : "We have also assured all the stakeholders as councillor Whitehead has said that we are sort of contradicting ourselves, because we say that free parking will jam up the streets and then we recommend on Saturdays. Many many municipalities decided to allow free parking on Saturdays because they don't have the employees competing for the parking spaces to the same degree. So obviously some municipalities do it. We want to try it here. We've assured the stakeholders that if there are enormous parking problems, we can go back and we can get rid of it. And they've agreed to help us monitor the situation in terms of improvements in their business over the next at least a year." Ferguson asks that the market and two BIAs provide an update.

Vote takes place. Whitehead votes against York Boulevard Parkade (part b). Everyone else on the committee supports all parts.

37 minutes for this item.

8.1 International Village Business Improvement Area (B.I.A.)

a) That an advancement in the amount of $10,000 to the International Village B.I.A. be approved;

b) That interest at the rate of 4.75% be charged on the $10,000 advancement;

c) That 100% of the advancement, plus interest charged, be deducted from the first payment to the International Village B.I.A. for its 2006 budget; and,

d) That the advancement be recorded as a balance sheet adjustment on the 2005 year end books.

Staff report given. No discussion on this item. Moved by Pearson, seconded by Ferguson . Carried.

1 minute for this item.

8.2 John C. Munro Hamilton International Airport - Federal Zoning Regulations (PED05137) (City Wide)
Report presented by Guy Paparella: "The report before you is requesting an update of federal zoning regulations that have been in place at the international airport since 1984. This should be done on a regular basis. The master plan, which was endorsed by city council, also indicated that this was out of date and needed to be looked at, particularly with respect to the future runway extension in the southerly direction. .this report puts forward a process that will take approximately two years, cost about $258,000 and the cost will be split 50-50 with the Tradeport manager of the airport. Again the airport regulation is something that's already in place. It restricts the heights of buildings, structures and objects including things like trees on regulated lands. It also prohibits electronic interference from things like telecommunications and I think that's critical in the future since that's an area of concern around the airport. And so we just want to ensure that the information was up to date. It also protects aircrafts from potential hazards like bird strikes, birds might be feeding on watercourses or ponds in the area and that's something that would be regulated by this as well. So once again it's a two year process. It commences later this fall. The federal government will be the lead on it. We will be consulted on a regular basis. They will be reporting back to our office and then we'll be reporting to council as to the process. There's public notices. There will be public meetings. There will be consultation. And then there will be a registered revised plan for the federal zoning. You can see from appendix B the cone-shaped areas of influence that we will be trying to protect. In particular the north-east direction over the city and into the south-westerly direction need to be expanded. The other two are already in place. There's just a slight expansion of those two facilities or aircraft services as they call them. And that's essentially it. If there's any questions, I'd be glad to answer them."

Moved by Ferguson , seconded by Kelly. Bratina : "What revenues did we bring in last year from the airport operations?" Paparella : "As per the lease agreement, revenue sharing doesn't commence until 2006, but we will be seeing some revenue based on the management fee and revenue, total gross revenue, that the Tradeport manages, uh, to bring in. Right now all we're collecting is taxes and . from the various buildings that they have in that area." Bratina : "Do we anticipate, is there any way of guessing what our revenues might be in the near future? And I'm sorry for that question." Paparella : "Yea, I could report back on an estimate. I mean right now the books will not be audited until next year so it's very difficult to assess whether it's going to be in the hundreds of thousands or its going to be in the millions of dollars depending on where we're going. But it's estimated by our financial department to be in the neighbourhood of $150,000 to $250,000 initially, and then obviously growing over time." Bratina : "I understand that the value of the property - we had a discussion about this - is somewhere in the $400 million range, and we're anticipating revenues of $100-200,000 from that." Paparella : "Keep in mind that it's operational revenue that we're speaking of. That's what the lease indicates. So the monies that accure would be audited and then we get a percentage of that revenue. The value of land is already something that we have and we own. So the more the value of the land increases, at the end of the lease obviously the citizens of Hamilton will garner that increase along with all the buildings and structures that will be part of that." Bratina : "The point is it seems like it's a burden to the taxpayer and I hope that the revenue projections will come to bear because as I mentioned before I'd just as soon we sold the whole thing and let somebody else worry about these investments, but thanks for the update.". Whitehead : "It is less than the $200,000 we're giving to the farmers market.." No further discussion. Motion is carried.

5 minutes for this item.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Pearson moves motion to remove three completed items from the outstanding agenda. Collins asks about SPCA trip to Calgary . Merulla speaks to following motion:

Demolition Permit - 130 Newlands Avenue (PED05150) (Ward 4)(Added Item) That the Director of Building and Licensing be authorized and directed to issue a demolition permit for 130 Newlands Avenue in accordance with By-Law 74-290 pursuant to Section 33 of The Planning Act as amended.

Merulla : "I guess there's a demolition permit that was requested. Now it's scheduled to go to council for October 26. The proponents want to expedite it cause they have a plan, obviously they need a permit, they want to build a new home. I was wondering if I could expedite that particular application to be dealt with at the October 12th council meeting. . I don't want to be putting anyone on the spot here." Coveyduck : "Are you suggesting that a motion go directly to council, then without a report coming to committee? If that's what you're suggesting I could take a look to see what the staff recommendation would be on that and if council is prepared to accept the motion, we could draft that up. I'm not familiar with that application. I'd have to go look it up." Approved with no other discussion.

Whitehead asks about status of issue of student boarding houses. Coveyduck suggests he and McHattie meet with staff before a motion is brought forward.

Whitehead says they have two in camera items relating to acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality. One of those subsequently appeared in the committee minutes and is noted below.

Committee went in camera at 11:11 am . Meeting officially ended at 11:59 am .

12.1 Matter relating to proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality . In camera. Approved motion: Aeropark Industrial Lands - Extension to the Commencement and Completion of Construction Dates (PED05136) (Ward 11 and City Wide) (Item 12.1) That the Offer to Purchase the lands known as Part of Lot 5, Concession 3, Township of Glanford designated as Pt. 1, 62R-12209 and Pts. 7, 13, 19, 20, 25, 26 & 27, 62R-12459, municipally known as 2530 Highway No. 6, formerly in the Town of Glanbrook, now in the City of Hamilton, duly executed by the Purchaser,

Orlick Industries Limited, on April 12, 2000 and approved by Regional Council on December 21, 1999 , Item 1 of Report 8-99 of the Economic Development and Tourism Committee, be amended as follows:

a) That Clause 8.7 - the commencement of construction date be extended from September 2, 2005 to May 2, 2006 .

b) That Clause 8.8 - the completion of construction date be extended from September 30, 2006 to May 30, 2007 .

And that the balance of the report remain confidential