Planning and Economic Development Committee


October 18/05 Report
Start time 9:37 am Went in camera at 11:17 am

Present: Whitehead (out 1x for 6 min); Mitchell; Pearson (out 1x for 1 min); Bratina (out 2x for 15 min); McHattie (out 1x for 2 min, left at 11:07); Merulla (left at 11:03); Ferguson (out 1x for 10 min); Kelly (arrived at 10:44); Di Ianni (arrived at 10:20 and left at 11:03)

Also present: McCarthy (left at 10:06).

Media: Ken Mann (CHML), Nicole McIntyre (Spectator), Kevin Werner ( Brabant ). All media left about 10:50

CATCH recorder: Don

Whitehead noted the presence of Mohawk students observing the meeting and that he is the ward councillor for Mohawk. Offered to make himself available after the committee meeting for questions. There were about 15 students, most of whom left part way through the meeting.

Addition to the agenda of the Via Rail Task Force minutes - item 5.13. Clerk also noted request from councillor McCarthy to move up item 6.5 to allow the principal of Waterdown High School to make his presentation and leave as soon as possible to get back to his school duties. Clerk also announced that Rob Hall from Public Health would be present later to provide an update on the well-water situation on Safari Road .

Mitchell asked that 8.1 be moved up as well. Ferguson : "I'd like to add an in camera item around property acquisition". Agenda changes approved.

6.5 OctProvision of Schools to Keep Pace with New Developments
(PD03136a) (City Wide) -Delegations from John Deven,
Principal of Waterdown High School, and two others
(From Outstanding Business List)

Staff report made by Joanne Hickey-Evans : "This item has been - arose a couple of years ago from councillor McCarthy whose concern was regarding the case of new development, particularly in Waterdown, and the ability of the school boards to build schools, particularly Hamilton District School Board." Staff looked at other municipalities. "City of Mississauga is really the only municipality that had some innovative approaches to deal with this issue." Meeting held "in February of last year" with Mississauga , McCarthy and school boards. Mississauga had "huge massive growth" where school construction was falling behind "so they implemented a system of staged development, and they established that there would only be so many building permits released each year so that they could catch up with the schools being built. Now the city of Mississiauga is significantly different from the city of Hamilton ,and in particular with respect to the Catholic School Board. They had a 27,000 student deficit. So they had a significant problem. They also had very large land developers and they had a lot of lots coming on stream in quick order. From the perspective of the city of Hamilton and the application of . staff are suggesting that we are not in the same situtation. Notes Catholic Board not involved and Public Board has surplus spaces in their system. "So we feel that with respect to the city of Hamilton , there are areas where they're experiencing rapid growth, however the school boards are not in a position to build schools that quickly. It's only in certain areas, as opposed to the city of Mississagua which was very very - had huge difficulties. So we suggest that we continue with the existing system we have. We designate sites through the secondary plan for elementary and secondary schools sites and once that is complete the school boards through draft plans of subdivision have the opportunity to purchase those sites . The city of Hamilton's role from a planning perspective is to provide that opportunity so that there are school sites available should the need arise. So our suggestion is that we continue with the existing system and have this item removed from the outstanding business list."

McCarthy : Mr John Deven will speak. He's "the only principal in the only Waterdown High School for an area that's going to double in population in the next 10 years. So this resolution is not going to go away and I'm not going to ask you to debate here even at the planning meeting. I think it's something that the planning committee should hear, but go back to the school council that councillor Ferguson and I are on to further analyze and then come back again. What I'm asking for is to have an open mind and open ears and listen to the experiences that are taking place in my community, a very quickly growing community given cabinet's decision to approve 6,500 homes, which translates to doubling the population in the Waterdown area alone in the next 8 to 10 years. And keeping in mind that this resolution, to have new development be a part of the construction of new schools - developers kick in for these schools, was a resolution that stood on the books in the town of Flamborough . Granted it took me five tries to get it through Flamborough council, but I was successful eventually. And it was at a point where 90% of our kids were housed in portables. And I mean they were putting on their coats and putting on their boots in the wintertime to go across to a building to go to the washroom. Ninety percent of the kids being housed in portables is a dire situtation. The formula that's in existence right now requires that all of the empty spaces in the Hamilton area to be filled before any new schools can be built in the growing communities. There's a fundamental difficulty with that. We're trying to populate our inner city. We're trying to keep the inner city viable. We've got many initiatives in fact to do that. The reality is we've got growing areas in the outskirts, but we've got no availability to deal with their education needs, because we're drawn in to the inner city because of pupil spaces being available. So what are we going to do? Are we going to drive the kids in the rural area all the way into Hamilton to access those pupil spaces? The school boards don't like that idea either because the cost of busing is exorbitant. So we have a dilemma. We're going to have to come up with better solutions than what's on the books right now . because it's going to become very apparent very quickly that it is insufficient."

Ferguson asks what area is used to calculate the available spaces. Hickey-Evans confirms the calculation is across all Hamilton . "Traditionally what's happened is that in the lower city you have excess and in the growing areas we have deficits in terms of pupil counts." Ferguson suggests that Hamilton is where Mississauga was 10 years ago. "The population is moving west. We've seen that through assessment reports. We've seen that through - the . report says that by 2032 there's going to be 2.3 million people living west of the 400.." Hickey-Evans says calculation based on what's inside the board's jurisdiction.

Mitchell says he agrees "wholeheartedly with councillor McCarthy. ... ward 11 due to double in the next ten years as well. The problem's in Winona , the problem's in Mount Hope .well on the way." Suggests meeting with MPPs. Also notes that Wentworth county board were allowed to collect development charges. Whitehead interrupts and says should be asking questions, not having discussion at this point.

John Devan : Here at request of McCarthy. "I've been the principal of Waterdown High School for last seven years". Growth in high school population. Built in 1992 and has a capacity of about 965 students. It currently has a population of 1320 . At this point in time there are about 450 kids above the ministry capacity. could say just add portables. "The problem with portables, particularly at the high school level, it's a little bit different at the elementary level, but at the high school level, the problem with portables is that they don't give us the kind of space we need. Portables are simply a square box that you put kids in and desks and a teacher and a TV set and an overhead projector. In high schools we need facilities like gyms, we need facilities like computer labs, science labs, and home ec facilities . and that's the big problem we're having. So for example in Waterdown, we have three gymnasiums and they are completely full every period of the day. In fact I have one class that doesn't have gym space so they have to rotate through the three gyms. One phys ed class is always without gym space. ... I have senior chemistry classes that don't have a lab so they have to rotate through these labs in order to get their lab time. Same is true with sewing and cooking; same thing with computer labs. It's easy to add portables, but they don't give us the kind of space that we require for good education of students. The Board has been in active negotiations for land for another extension to our school. They've been negotiating now for two years. The price of that land around us has double in two years, and I think negotiations are still very difficult in terms of the Board being able to afford the land to put an addition onto the high school. So I guess my point is, yes the Hamilton Wentworth District School Board has a surplus number of spaces, but in certain areas like the Stoney Creek area, the Waterdown area, which are experiencing relatively rapid growth, and it's very difficult for the Board at this point to be able to get land, purchase land and build an addition without the kind of funding that they should have. And that's why I support, and I know many people in Flamborough support councillor McCarthy's request that the city look at what they can do to help the situation out. ."

Ferguson asks number of students there now. Devan : "1320, I'm built for 980." Ferguson : "Let's fast forward four years. How many are in 6, 7, 8 right now in your catchment area?" Devan says they are getting a 2% increase in each year so "in four years time . were looking at another 150 kids.but that's going on past ways, with the prediction that future growth in Waterdown in the next few years will be much more rapid than over the last seven years." Ferguson : "So you're saying it could be 1500 in the next four years?" Devan : "Easily 1500 based on past historical growth. I believe, and I think many people do that it will be more rapid than that."

Ferguson to staff: ".building starts in Waterdown. What do you anticipate growth will be over the next four years?" McCabe : "What we have is a draft approved plan and a splitting of the traffic capacity in south Waterdown including Upcountry including about 500 units. You'll see that proceed very quickly over the next three years. The balance of the new development is dependent on the resolution of the master transportation issues. So my own feeling is that the funding discussions that we have to have to get this up and running, and the possible bumping of the EA, we may be at a standstill in Waterdown for a good 6-7 years beyond that 500 units." Mitchell asks about charging development charges for schools. McCabe says city has no power to do this, only the school board.

Merulla : ".What I'm hearing is that I think we need to amend the Planning Act, or have the province amend the Planning Act ." Asks what Ministry should be approached. McCabe : "The Ministry of Education. This is an educational matter. It's all related to the funding and conditions that have to be put in place for the construction of a new school. It's not a Planning Act matter. As Jo-Ann has advised you, we plan for the provision of school sites. We require developers to reserve sufficient school sites in accordance with our community planning process, whether it be for elementary schools or high schools. Those blocks are just frozen and available for the school boards to build schools on. So we've done our planning. It's not a Planning Act matter. It's a funding matter. And it really rests with the Ministry of Education, the Education Act and the school boards." Merulla : "There are some linkages between the Ministry of Education and the Planning Act in the sense that I've seen them, and I'm sure you have, on the mountain where land has been dedicated, and flipped and sold or never developed. How do we actually make it binding, once that land has been dedicated, that indeed there will be monies allocated to the development of a school?" McCabe : "Well I guess the question is how can the city force the school boards to build the school, and that's what the question is. And I don't think you can."

Whitehead raises concern that the price of the land has doubled "and that's what's making negotiations tough". Agrees real issue is funding problem but "from a planning perspective, I'm sure we can provide some controls on the price of that land". Merulla suggests need for a linkage between the school site and the actual development in the area "Anything short of that we're going through the motions, as we've done in the past, and I've seen that quite often on the mountain." Says problem should be directed to the appropriate channels "which obviously in this case is the province". Whitehead : ".what I'm hearing fundamentally is the formula doesn't work". Supports moving the issue to the city-board liaison committee "We need to provide some leadership, and some guidance, and quite frankly some support to the school boards to address this issue. What's not considered in the formula is the geographic distances. So when you're just talking about numbers and surpluses and deficits, you're not talking about the geographic challenges. You know, Waterdown versus downtown. ." Supports McCarthy's suggestion to send this to the liaison committee.

McCarthy thanks committee for support and letting her speak [she's not on planning committee]. "What I've got here is a scenario where this has worked very successfully in Mississauga . Whether or not we can devise the policies and implement them in the development charges, however they've done it, it's worked well. And Joanne can you speak to that - how Mississauga has in fact tied it in to the construction and development within the Municipal Act?" Hickey - Evans : ".what they did is through the Planning Act they had an agreement whereby - and this started back in 1998 - that they restricted the number of building permits. And it was a condition of the plan of subdivision. The other way that they did it was very interesting. The developers gave the land to the school board, and then the school board would pay them back over a series of years, even though they may not be in a position to build a school for five years, six years, seven years. That means that - that's the assumption that they are going to build, and that they have the money to do so. . this through the subdivision. It was a tough agreement to get, to deal with it. We have worked with school boards." but they're not keen on that approach, and in the case of Catholics it wasn't relevant.

McCarthy recalls taking info to Flamborough council "and we got three schools out of it. Not that the plans were implemented. We did in fact, through resolution, put in the Planning Act that we put a restriction on the number of homes and we implemented pretty much the same bylaw. What transpired was we got two new schools out of that. The developers didn't pay for that, but it rattled the cages of the powers that be to release the funds for those two new schools. Otherwise we'd still be sitting here with 120% of our kids housed in portables. I think it's safe to assume, given the dynamics that we have in play right now, that they're not working, and they're not working well. We have to come up with something. I'm in a growing community, and while this may be specific to my area - as was a councillor in Mississauga - I don't care what the rest of you do, she said, in my council, but give me the flexibility to deal with this development in a logical way, to have the schools provided in my area, and they did that for her. And that's what we saw in Mississauga . So it needs some analysis. I'd love it to go through this council, but we're going to have to do a bit more analysis and get a few more people on side before that happens. There is a resolution coming to this council, that I'm going to be presenting, and it's asking that the same way that we get parkland dedication, parkland money in lieu of parkland - we ask for 5% in lieu of parkland dedication from developers. We should be doing the same thing for school sites. Because as we've heard, developers are, yes, putting aside a few acres, but the price that they're asking for those lands, they've got the schools, certainly bankrupt and blackmailed to be perfectly honest. We're in a position where the cost of the land for an addition is too costly for the school board. So there's going to be a motion coming forward to deal with that issue, and we're going to ask, hopefully the province, to rectify that inequity for us. But I will ask that this resolution, this issue, be brought over to the liaison committee for further debate." Moved by McHattie and seconded by Merulla . Whitehead : "It would be nice to have lands locked in a pre-development prices or assessment so we wouldn't fall into that category, but I think that's a fair suggestion." Motion carried. [30:28] [28 minutes for this item]

8.1 Applicationfor a Change in Zoning for the Lands Located at 25 Talbot Lane
(Glanbrook)(PD05131) (Ward 11)(Tabled by Committee May 17, 2005,
pending removal ofunauthorised storage containers fromsite)
Mitchell had this moved forward. There was no discussion and the item was carried. (2 minutes for this item)

5.1  By-law to Establish the City of Hamilton Municipal Heritage
Committee (PED05127) (City Wide)

5.2 Application for a Variance to Stoney Creek Sign By-law No. 3042-89,
75 Centennial Parkway North (Hamilton) (PED05139) (Wards 5 and 9)

5.3 Declaration of Surplus Lands - Proposed Land Exchange Between the City
of Hamilton and Marz Homes Holdings Inc., 464 Jones Road and 496 Jones
Road, Stoney Creek (PED05148) (Ward 11)

5.4 Declaration of Surplus Property - 281 Herkimer Street, Hamilton,
(former CIBC Building) (PED05152) (Ward 1)

5.5 Surplus Property, Ontario Realty Corporation, Fruitland Road and North
Service Road, Stoney Creek (PED05153) (Ward 10)

5.6 Potentially Surplus Property, Ontario Realty Corporation, 425 Winona Road,
in the City of Stoney Creek, now in the City of Hamilton (PED05154) (Ward 11)

5.7 PotentiallySurplus Property, Ontario Realty Corporation, 560 Grays Road in the
City ofStoney Creek, now in the City of Hamilton (PED05155) (Wards 5 and10)

5.8 MinorRevisions to the Pre-Christmas Free Parking Strategy for Business
ImprovementAreas (BIAs) (PED05142) (Wards 1, 3 and 4)

5.9 Adjustmentsto School Crossing Guard Locations resulting from School
Closures/BoundaryChanges (PED05141) (Wards 5, 9, 10, 12 and 15)

5.10   Demolition Permit - 56 Chipman Avenue (PED05149) (Ward 7) McHattie moved to require a building permit before demolition permit is required. Carried.

5.11 DemolitionPermit - 36 Sinclair Court (PED05151) (Ward 5)

5.12 Advisory Committee Minutes - For Information

(a) AncasterVillage Core Advisory Committee Meeting of January 10, 2005

(b) AncasterVillage Core Advisory Committee Meeting of February 21, 2005

(c) AncasterVillage Core Advisory Committee Meeting of March 14, 2005

(d) AncasterVillage Core Advisory Committee Meeting of April 11, 2005

(e) Ancaster Village Core Advisory Committee Meeting of May 9, 2005

(f) AncasterVillage Core Advisory Committee Meeting of June 13,2005

(g) AncasterVillage Core Advisory Committee Meeting of July 11,2005

(h) AncasterVillage Core Advisory Committee Meeting of August 8, 2005

5.13 Via Rail minutes. Bratina suggested a change in wording for the title of first resolution. He said the change was suggested by Mayor Di Ianni. The change was approved.

There was no discussion on any other Consent item, and all items were approved. (total 4 minutes on the consent items)


6.1 Applicationfor a Change in Zoning for the Property Located at
589 Fifty Road (Stoney Creek)(PED05147) (Ward 11)
The presentation was foregone by the committee. No discussion. Carried. (2 minutes on this item)

6.3 Application for a Change in Zoning for Lands Located
at 447 Dundas Street East (Flamborough) (PED05143) (Ward 15)
A presentation took place because McHattie had suggested that at least one be done for the benefit of the Mohawk students. Whitehead also briefly explained the Public Meeting process to the students. There was no discussion on this item by the committee and the recommendations were adopted unanimously. (8 minutes on this item)

6.4 Applicationfor a Further Modification in Zoning for Lands Located
at 121 Fiddlers GreenRoad (Ancaster) (PED05145) (Ward 12)
The proposal here is to create three lots out of one existing lot, with the houses behind each other, but have all three lots share the frontage on Fiddlers Green. This will create two flag shaped lots for the back two houses (essentially the house lot plus a long sliver of land for a driveway). The proponent submitted a proposed change to its plans on Monday and staff indicated that they hadn't had an opportunity to evalute this. The change asks that the 6 metre planted area along the edge of the lot be reduced to three metres and that instead a boulevard be established between the two driveways for the back two homes. The amount of landscaped land would remain the same, and the developer's agent (Keith Birch) said the change would allow saving a large Oak tree that otherwise would have been removed. A homeowner (John Tickle) whose lot backs onto the landscaped strip (and driveways) addressed the committee. He was concerned about the reduction in the landscaped strip and wanted to know why the two houses needed two separate driveways. He noted that it wasn't reasonable to put a 'street' behind his house like this. On a motion from Ferguson , the committee tabled the item. This was proposed by Ferguson because of the late changes by the proponent, but a decision was made to hold the 'public meeting' today so it wouldn't have to be done again. Of course, this meant that the homeowner had no opportunity to examine the changes, nor did the individual who had sent a letter, nor did others in the area who had been circulated the original proposals. (22 minutes on this item).

6.2 Applicationsfor a Draft Plan of Subdivision and for a Change in Zoning for
Lands Located at1201 Upper James Street (Hamilton) (PED05140) (Ward7)
This item was postponed because Kelly had not arrived yet. Kelly arrived just as the committee was finishing the public meetings section of their meeting and taking up this item. Chair Whitehead began by asking for anyone from the public who wanted to speak to this. Seeing no-one he then asked the committee if they wanted to hear the staff presentation. That was foregone. Kelly then moved the motion. At that point, the clerk noted that Whitehead needed to ask for public delegations and he replied that he had already done that. However he had missed asking for comments from the proponent. He did that to the agent who was in the gallery who indicated he supported the staff report. McHattie: ".I noticed HSR made comments, and staff felt they couldn't provide the walkway that HSR was asking for at this time. There's further development happening. It was a good explanation. So .given that explanation, which makes sense, what is the walk to the HSR. How many minutes does it take to walk to the HSR? On the map it appears to be fairly short but it's hard to tell." Whitehead asked for a staff response but no one was present who could respond. He then turned to councillor Kelly: "I think councillor McHattie is right. I think it's a minimal walk and as I say its included in the staff report the anticipation is that the next stage of this will actually include the walkway. There was some concerns about the location of the proposed walkway here, and some safety and other issues too that staff decided that they wanted to hold that in abeyance and move forward with it. There will be a walkway, which is going to make things even easier, but we just want to make sure it's done at the proper location." McHattie: "I guess I'll go with the short walk to the HSR answer for now." Whitehead ask the staff person, Heather Travis who says: "I don't have any sense of the number of minutes. The pathway is through Lorenzo and Jennings Chipman to Upper James, and that's where the closest stop would be. I don't have any sense of the number of minutes." Ferguson seconded the motion. Carried. (3 minutes on this item).





Sidewalk issue - Mitchell and Whitehead (to come)



Committee went in camera at 11:17 am.

12.1 Matter relating to litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality

© Citizens At City Hall (CATCH)