January 6/04 Report
9:30 am in Council Chambers

Members Present:

Bill Kelly, Maria Pearson, Brian McHattie, Murray Ferguson, Dave Braden, Terry Whitehead, Andrea Horwath, Dave Mitchell, Sam Merulla (late 9:46 am).

Others Present:

Phil Bruckler and Bernie Morelli.

Clerk's staff reported on proposed changes to the agenda including removal of item 6.9, addition of a 6.23 item under the Consent agenda, and addition of an item on the Good Shepherd proposed development in the Strathcona neighbourhood which was recommended to be the first item after election of chair and vice-chair.

Also announced that items 7.1 and 7.5 could not be dealt with at the present time because of changes to the planning act that happened before Christmas. Ferguson asked that this be first item after elections.

1. Bill Kelly confirmed as Chair - moved by Mitchell, seconded by Whitehead
2. Two Vice-chairs
   • Terry Whitehead: moved by McHattie, seconded by Horwath
   • Dave Mitchell: moved by Pearson, seconded by Horwath

McHattie moved Whitehead nomination, and then Kelly proposed two vice-chairs. Supported by Pearson. Horwath asked if this means 1st vice chair becomes chair in 2005 and 2nd vice chair in 2006. Kelly says his understanding is that the vice-chair won't necessarily become chair. Whitehead supports two vice-chairs. Kelly continues to call them first and second vice chair. Whitehead 1st and Mitchell 2nd.

First discussion focused on items 7.1 to 7.5, the Public Hearings section of the agenda which considers applications for zoning changes and Official Plan amendments. Staff (Mr. Mallard) reported that two of the five items (7.1 and 7.5) cannot go forward because of the provincial government decision to impose a moratorium on all land use changes outside the urban boundary in the proposed Greenbelt. "Ministers zoning order December 16 which precludes any uses of land, building or structures that do not conform with zoning" already in place. Pending clearer definition of what is considered urban uses. Staff report that just for the development west area which includes Dundas, Flamborough and Ancaster area at least 20 applications currently being worked on in, and will likely affect 30 to 40 applications total. Staff believe that the moratorium MAY apply to such applications.

Braden thinks the greenbelt legislation is for, but the issues here including 7.1 are relatively minor with no significance in the big picture. The province will take a huge amount of time in determining what's significant and what isn't, and this isn't at the top of their agenda. Councillors appear to be all agreed that this is a bad thing, but are divided on whether to ignore the provincial rules and wait to be told they can't proceed, or to put a hold on the applications and seek further clarification from the province. Braden notes that agricultural economy is in real trouble and can't stand by waiting for clairification. Needs jobs and opportunities now. Braden advocates moving ahead to see quickly how the province will respond. Supported by Mitchell ("these decisions should be made here at the local municipal level where the knowledge is"), Ferguson and Pearson (all representing wards that have affected lands). Kelly advocates seeking further clarification. Although he is the chair, he speaks more frequently and at greater length than any other councillor. He should temporarily step down from the chair if he wants to engage in the debate.

City lawyer Art Zuidema: "certainly from a business perspective we can all appreciate that the action taken by the province is draconian and may in fact catch a lot of things that we would view pragmatically as things that shouldn't be caught." But taking action may create more problems than trying to have dialogue with the province. Warns councillors that province is making planning rules more strict. Mitchell argues that Hamilton has "stricter land division rules than the province" so it should be allowed to make its own decisions without provincial interference. Staff say they have a meeting scheduled in early February with Ministry staff over the issue of the proposed urban boundary expansion in Stoney Creek, and will raise these issues there. Kelly advocates putting pressure on provincial MPPs. Whitehead suggests this is not the time for a political approach, suggests a letter from staff to the Ministry. Merulla intervenes and get staff to explain reasons behind the greenbelt action. Kelly eventually got his way to defer items for 30 days to get more info from the province. He also raised that Hamilton needs to find allies among other municipalities. Robertson will report back in two weeks after his meeting with the deputy minister and make a decision on re-circulation of items.

(I think this item is significant. If Hamilton is doing 20-40 land use changes outside the urban boundary every year, it's no wonder that our "rural" areas are being steadily developed. This is the other side of the urban boundary expansion coin. Either they formally expand the boundary, or they do it informally in a piecemeal fashion and achieve much the same thing. The provincial moratorium is long overdue. Note that it also has blocked the City's attempt to expand the urban boundary out to Winona on top of some of the best tenderfruit land in Canada. City politicians are not happy about this at all, and we can expect to see a campaign waged against the whole greenbelt and moratorium ideas. It started the next day with a news article by Chinta Puxley. It was titled: "Grits stand in way of new church site". However, there was no proposal before the committee about a church site. This must be one of the other 38 proposals referred to be staff. It appears someone has carefully picked out the "most outrageous" example of projects affected by the moratorium, and is using this to club the province and its greenbelt initiative. The article is reprinted below.)

Grits stand in way of new church site
Moratorium on urban sprawl delays projects
By Chinta Puxley
The Hamilton Spectator, January 8, 2004

A Flamborough church congregation is caught in the province's battle against "runaway urban sprawl."

Members of the Canadian Reformed Church of Flamborough have been searching for a site to build their new church for six years. They thought they had found a perfect site on Brock Road -- a piece of agricultural land just outside the urban boundary.

The congregation of about 450 members invested $15,000 to prepare a re-zoning application only to find the province is putting all development outside Hamilton's boundary on hold to curb urban sprawl in the Golden Horseshoe.

"It was a shock," said Bill Oostdyk, chair of the congregation's building committee. "For six years, we have been looking for a piece of property so we can have a home of our own. Now it appears (the Ontario government) wants to put a stop to everything. We have nowhere else to turn."

The church's construction is one of about 40 expansion projects in limbo because of the Liberal government's new moratorium on development outside the urban boundary. The government is examining a Golden Horseshoe greenbelt and introduced legislation in late December to curb urban sprawl.

While some say the government had to act quickly to halt the unfettered growth of cities, city staff and councillors say the province acted too hastily.

Art Zuidema, assistant corporate counsel for Hamilton, called the legislation "Draconian," because it affects many developments that don't necessarily contribute to urban sprawl.

"It may catch a lot of things that shouldn't be caught and held up," he told the planning and economic development committee this week. "But municipalities are creations of the province. We only have the powers the province provides."

The city is taking 30 days to clarify how the legislation affects local development proposals. After that, some councillors are ready to fight the moratorium.

"When constituents of this city apply for something, they want to see it go forward," Glanbrook Councillor David Mitchell said. "This is not fair to them."

But others say the government's move is a positive step toward dealing with urban sprawl.

Ted McMeekin, Liberal MPP for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot, explained that the developers were going around municipal governments and regularly building outside the urban boundary. The result, he says, was "runaway urban sprawl."

McMeekin said cities needed some time to examine how to manage their growth and protect the environment. He adds that the construction of a church outside Hamilton's boundary, on agricultural land, is exactly the kind of growth the government has to curb.

He said exceptions to the rule are going to be rare.

"Everybody has got an exception they want to see approved. I'm proud the government moved in this direction."

Local environmentalists say the temporary ban on development will help decrease pollution, increase the efficiency of land use and slow the disappearance of agricultural land.

Lynda Lukasik, executive director of Environment Hamilton, suggests city council tends to "crumble" in the face of developers. She said the moratorium will give the city a chance to evaluate its growth policy.

"Let's take the time to really learn to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. There isn't a lot of grounds to justify constantly pushing out the urban boundary."

Still, members of Flamborough's Canadian Reformed Church are hoping they can make a case for construction outside the boundary.

Oostdyk is talking with McMeekin and hopes the church can get an exemption.

cpuxley@thespec.com
905-526-3468

3.1 Good Shepherd update. Kelly begins by asking Art Zuidema for an update. Zuidema asks if committee wants to go in camera. McHattie opposed. Zuidema proceeds and explains that re-zoning of the site where the Good Shepherd (GS) wants to do its development (the former Loretto Academy property on King between Ray and Pearl) couldn't proceed because conditions had not been met. The rezoning had been approved in August subject to the closure of two existing GS sites in Ward 3, but it subsequently came out that the GS could not guarantee this because the Elizabeth Fry Society owned one of the buildings and didn't want to lose its ability to use it as a residential care facility. Discussions have taken place between GS and EFS since then and "Elizabeth Fry Society have been very cooperative in meeting with the GS and the City and being part of a solution to the matter and moving this matter forward." Agreement reached. "Elizabeth Fry Society will abandon any emergency care, residential care facility use and any rights that they may have in a non-conforming way to that property". Agreement contingent on OMB approval (homeowners are appealing the August council decision to allow the GS development).. Payment by GS to Elizabeth Fry Society will not happen until OMB approval. "Agreement is also contingent on the City continuing to stay its course on its current position which is approval of the zoning for the new site." If successful, GS will move two facilities into one larger new one at new site. Downzoning will be on basis of tripartite agreement.

Whitehead: Can Elizabeth Fry Society sell the building and would this affect agreement? Zuidema "thinks" that would be covered in the agreement.
Ferguson: Why is this being brought back to council if we now have situation where GS is in compliance with previous council decision? Kelly provides explanation.

Cathy Gazzola from Durand Neighbourhood Association speaks to committee: "Durand Neighbourhood Association has been around for 30 years and we encourage civic participation, and we're very concerned about the bylaw has been disregarded with regards to this development. We're headed into very brutal budget process and its hard to get people to have confidence in the decisions that City Council is making if a bylaw is disregarded and not followed."

McHattie asks to question Mr. Fothergill (representative of GS and current president of Chamber of Commerce). Kelly agrees but 'reminds' councillors that we're here to talk about the conditions, and that the merits of the project have already been debated and will get discussed at the OMB. "I'll allow a little leeway here but I really don't want to get sidetracked and get back into a debate about the whole issue itself."
McHattie asks about division in number of beds between the two adjoining new facilities (10-50 in August, 20-40 in December). Does this impact on the decision. Fothergill says it was part of a compromise package but is not part of the August 13 bylaw. Staff says 60 beds but no differentation in division.
Horwath asks staff if the bylaw moratorium will be followed in future. Staff (Lee-Ann Coveyduck, head of planning) says anyone can make an application to change the bylaw. Up to council to change this and staff would provide "its best advice". "But any time we do receive an application we have to bring it forward to committee."

At this point!!! (10:30 am) Clerk's staff distributed the motion to councillors. Horwath argues that there is no need for a motion because nothing has now changed from the August decision. If conditions have been met we should just receive the information. Zuidema explains need for motion "this whole matter has been surrounded in a cloud of uncertainty and I think what we've tried to achieve through this resolution is to clarify who's doing what and to set the rules as we move forward. This resolution has been shared with Good Shepherd and he has indicated his agreement with this. I guess while it may not be entirely necessary, on a going forward basis, it provides us with some direction and the clear direction of the will of council, and as I say we do have GS on side with the contents of this so we brought it forward to avoid any further misunderstanding on the part of any of the parties."

Whitehead: "This has just been put on my table now and I'm wondering if in the future if there is a resolution that's going to brought forward if we could have it in our hands in time to digest it and ask questions. So why are we receiving this document now?" Kelly retorts: "Why are we receiving it now? Because we asked for it." Whitehead clarifies patiently and Kelly dances away without answering his question. Instead he explains things as though Whitehead had missed the whole meeting. Says committee could receive it but he thinks it should be passed as a motion. Whitehead asks again very patiently. Kelly responds: "In a perfect world that would be fantastic but my understanding is that this wasn't finally crystallized until sometime yesterday." Zuidema apologizes and explains that Elizabeth Fry Society board met on Dec. 29 and "yesterday was the first notice we had, official notice that the deal was a go and in fact this resolution wasn't forwarded to the general managers for their final approval until 5:04 last evening. I created it yesterday and I apologize but in a perfect world we'd come back earlier. We're dealing with a pressure cooker problem here."

Zuidema wants council to pass the motion to express clearly its position "as we move forward to the OMB". Ferguson moves it and thanks Zuidema for his effort. Morelli suggests changing the opening wordings "that council continues to endores". He thinks that is potentially inflammatory. Wording gets fiddled with

McHattie supports Whitehead's concerns and notes that the reason Council is dealing with this at all is because the proponent seemed to discover in December (calls it "mystical") it wasn't able to comply, and this has put the Elizabeth Fry Society in a very difficult position and "felt a lot of pressure". "I'd like to get into a position in the future where we're not forced to be in that pressure cooker (referred to by Zuidema) by proponents who don't actually deal with the problems". Has put council in difficult position, staff has spent a lot of resources because of the proponent.

Kelly offers to remove first line of resolution. Zuidema alters it further to remove other references to continuing to endorse. Ferguson, seconded by Whitehead. McHattie, Horwath, Pearson recorded as opposed.

5.1 Ferguson and Morelli left. Both returned 10-12 minutes later. Presentation by Brian K Nolan about downtown BIA. Heard by Council but no questions and Horwath then moved acceptance of report. No one opposed. No discussion. Merulla left during presentation. Came back 17 minutes later for item 7.3. Whitehead asked why no discussion during next item. Kelly said he was too late. Whitehead wanted to have staff response. Kelly said he should talk to staff afterwards.

6.23: added item - removal of holding category. Apparently purpose is to allow negotiations with the applicant for a subdivision agreement. Passed without opposition.

Note that items 7.1 and 7.5 were withdrawn because of conflict with the provincial moratorium. Kelly hadn't remembered and tried to start discussion on 7.1.

(All items in the Public Meetings section (section 7) can be addressed for up to five minutes by anyone in attendance.)

7.2 Horwath left during discussion of this item, returned for next item. This item proposes rezoning of 521 Barton (corner of DeWitt) to permit a bakery, restaurant, patio and banquet facilities to "serve the daily needs of the surrounding industrial neighbourhood." Owner previously got permission to use site for an automotive dealership but has now changed his plans. Discussion focused on the fact that a different map had been sent out to neighbours of this zoning change than the map that appeared in the presentation to council. This brought out the fact that the wrong map had been sent out and this had raised concerns of a citizen which were addressed by staff (ie the other people don't know they got the wrong map). The map presented on the overhead was different than the one in the agenda package and it was also misleading because it showed a long piece of property highlighted but that wasn't being re-zoned. Sergio Manchia represented proponent and took responsibility for the mapping error. No public comments made.

7.3 Rezoning from "open space" to "rural residential" to allow construction of a house on land along the lakefront owned by Llewellyn Smith (ED Smith empire). Put forward by City to correct a mistake made in 1992 by Stoney Creek staff. Smith objected in 1994 and was advised it would be corrected. Rezoning now opposed by two neighbours on the basis that it blocks their view to the lake. Citizen Larry Pearce opposed the item. He said he had invested close to $300,000 in purchase of home and property on information from real estate agent that it would be park area and his view to the lake would not be obstructed. He also offered to purchase the property from Smith. Suggests that it be made into a park. Nick Dallesendro spoke in support of Mr. Pearce and said his understanding was that no house could be built on the Smith property and it may also block his view and the view of other homes. Mitchell (ward councillor) says he has met with Mr. Smith and tells committee that "he does farm full time and has just invested well over $1 million in new fruit trees in the Stoney Creek area and I think that's absolutely fantastic for our new city, and he's also invested shoreline erosion money on the front of this property. It's fabulous. I wish it was done to that quality everywhere along the shoreline." Says it may go back 12 years in time but promises made so he supports keeping those promises. Says the property is so large that a home can be built on it without affecting Mr. Pearce's sightlines to the water. Pearce tries to intervenes but is drowned out by Kelly.

Pearson says she sat on planning committee for nine years, and she recalls this item and it is "essentially a cleanup matter". Says that a number of people will lose sightlines to the lake between here and Jones Road over the next few years but "that's part of progress". Also notes there is another property between Pearce and Smith which could also block his sightlines. Mitchell confirms that only one house can be built on Smith property. Moved by Mitchell,seconded by Pearson.

7.4 Rezoning from agricultural to residential but property is already completely surrounded by residential. Indication perhaps of out-of-date zoning. No discussion.

9.1 Subcommittes being re-established. Horwath and Ferguson appointed to Cleanliness and Security in the Downtown Core Task Force. McHattie appointed to Hamilton BIA coordinating committee. McHattie and Pearson appointed to Municipal Heritage Committee. Merulla disappeared for 20 minutes during this and the following item (11:30 to 11:50 am).