Kingston residents question county paving policy

BY KIRK STARRATT

Kings County Register

Some Kingston residents think a Kings County bylaw relating to the paving of certain streets is discriminatory, and should be amended - or rescinded altogether.

Yvon La Croix of Acadia Drive, Champlain Heights subdivision, Kingston; made a presentation on behalf of concerned residents to Kings County council’s committee of the whole in June to voice the grievances of neighbours and homeowners on Acadia Drive pertaining to Bylaw 81.

Residents believe the bylaw applies only to selected streets in the municipality and is, therefore, detrimental to homeowners residing on these specific streets.

“Why should we - the homeowners of Acadia Drive - be burdened with a special tax because we reside on a certain street?” La Croix asked. “We pay taxes to maintain all streets in the County of Kings, at the same level as all other homeowners who do not live on the selected streets.”

La Croix drew attention to a supporting letter from Kings West MLA Leo Glavine, in which Glavine asks the same question. Glavine commended county staff for earlier professional handling of difficult questions at a community meeting in April. The general consensus then was cost-shared paving was reasonable, but many asked why they should have to pay any amount. There are doubts as to why 12 streets could have been caught in the process of a change in provincial/ municipal road responsibility April 1, 1995, and this should be re-opened: Champlain Heights was not approved until October 1996. Grandfathering these subdivision roads favoured the subdivision developers - at the expense of residents.

Councillor Wayne Atwater said, if council agreed, he would move for a full staff report on the matter for the July COTW session. The motion carried unanimously.

Councillor Janet Newton said she wanted the residents to realize, for paving projects on other similar streets, homeowners pay half.

Councillor Chris Parker said residents signed a petition in April in favour of the paving project, knowing they’d have to pay.

La Croix said the residents figured the street should be paved and the issue could be debated later.

J-Class streets’ situation

Later in the COTW session, Engineering and Public Works director Richard Lloyd presented a staff report on the funding program for J-Class streets, a 50/ 50 cost-sharing initiative involving the county and the province.

County council approved and submitted its annual priority list that included nine J-Class streets in December 2007.

The Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal has indicated two streets are eligible for funding under the program during the 2008/ 2009 fiscal year: 0.33 km of Northview Drive, at an estimated cost of $92,200, and 0.42 km of Howe Avenue, at an estimated cost of $120,000. Work will include grading, gravelling and asphalt concrete paving, with 50 per cent of the cost to be paid by the municipality through an area rate in accordance with Bylaw 50.

Before the work is completed, a successful petition process must confirm at least two-thirds of affected residents are in favour of the project. Northview Drive residents have completed a successful petition, and engineering staff is preparing a petition for Howe Avenue.

Councillor Ted Palmer asked for an explanation of what a J-Class road is and the difference between Bylaw 50 and Bylaw 81.

Lloyd said J-Class streets are provincially classified, usually subdivision roads. Bylaw 81 was enacted for streets that had their ownership transferred to the municipality from the province in 1995. Streets covered under Bylaw 81 are municipally owned, and don’t qualify under the J-Class funding program.