Present: Pearson; Merulla (out 3x for 15 min); Kelly (out 6x for 53 min, then left after in camera session at 12:00); Bratina (out 3x for 9 min); Whitehead (out 4x for 68 min); Mitchell (out 3x for 61 min); McHattie (out 1x for 2 min).

Also present: Bruckler (arrived 10:32 ); Di Ianni ( 11:10 to 12:00 )

Media: Werner ( Brabant ), Mann (CHML), Van Harten (Spectator), Sweeney (CH-TV).

CATCH: Don

Changes to the Agenda

Item 6.7 withdrawn because the issue has been resolved

Item 5.1 removed at the request of staff to do further review.

3.1 Minutes of Meeting February 21, 2006 Approved

DELEGATION REQUESTS

4.1 [Added] From John Dolbec, Hamilton Chamber of Commerce, wishing to speak to April 4 meeting on the issue of GRIDS. Approved

CONSENT ITEMS

All consent items were approved without discussion.

5.1 Removal of 'H' Holding Symbol From Lands Located at 87 Edgehill Drive (PED06067) (Ward 8)

5.2 Demolition Permit - 11 Morris Avenue (PED06082) (Ward 3)

5.3 Demolition Permit - 220 Grace Avenue (PED06080) (Ward 4)

5.4 King Street West Business Improvement Area (B.I.A.) Proposed Budget and Schedule ofPayment for 2006 (PED06079) (Ward2)

5.5 CommercialProperty Improvement Grant Program (C.P.I.G.) Applications (PED06074) (Wards 1,2, 3, 4, 9, 13)

5.6 Advisory Committee Minutes - For Information

(a) HamiltonLACAC (Municipal Advisory Committee) Meeting of January 26,2006

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DELEGATIONS

6.1 Application for a Change in Zoning for Lands Known as 1053-1055 Barton Street East (Hamilton) (PED06069) (Ward 3)

No public delegation. Tabled for two weeks to allow Merulla to discuss this with the ward councillor, Bernie Morelli. (4 minutes on this item)

6.2  Application for a Change in Zoning for the Property Located at 709-715 Main Street East and 104 Sherman Avenue South (Hamilton) (PED06068) (Ward3)

This is three apartment buildings being severed to three separate properties. The two easterly ones were subject to a fire and are now being renovated. Three residents from the neighbourhood spoke, raising concerns about the possible conversion of some of this to a residential care facility (already a surplus of these in this area). The proponent gave assurances this is not in the plans. Main objections, however, were about parking. There are 59 units in the three buildings but only 5 parking spaces. Staff explained this can't be addressed without taking down one of the buildings and the city has no legal ability to force this. Residents also expressed concern about past tenants being problematic. Proponent says he wants to attract higher income tenants and will be raising the rents from (past) $400 to the $650 range. Decision was tabled for two weeks to allow for consultation with the local councillor (Morelli).  (45 minutes on this item)

6.3 Application for a Modification in Zoning for Lands Located at 1092 Main Street West (PED06075) (Ward 1)

No discussion and no public delegations on this item. (3 minutes)

6.4 Application for Change in Zoning for Lands Located at 487 Glover Road (Stoney Creek) (PED06066) (Ward 11) (5 minutes) Approved.

6 .5 Applications to Amend the Ancaster Official Plan and Zoning By-law No. 87-57 to Permit a Kennel Located at 1469 Sawmill Road (Ancaster) (PED06072) (Ward12)

Staff believes that a kennel qualifies as an agricultural use, and because the site is isolated,there should be no problems. Passed without discussion. (6 minutes)

6.6  Application for a Change in Zoning for the Property Located at 4 Bridgewater Court (Stoney Creek) (PED06070) (Ward 9)

6.7  Hamed Topalovic, Bosnian Islamic Centre of Hamilton, respecting fine for snow clearing at 202 Barton Street East, Stoney Creek (Item withdrawn)

6.8 Pat Harthun respecting parking by-law enforcement on Nellida Crescent Staff and councillor Whitehead have been involved in trying to solve this and offending neighbour has been ticketed several times. Ongoing activity promised. (4 minutes on this item)

PRESENTATIONS

7.1 McMaster Innovation Park Master Site Plan Concept (no copy)

Presentations from Diamond and Schmitt, Architects, and from representatives from McMaster

[ 1:21:10 ] Introduced by Tim McCabe , director of real estate and development. "It's approximately a 40 acre former brownfield parcel. It's going to be quickly rejuvenated . in the immediate years ahead to a bustling research and development park with over one million square feet of building and hopefully more than 1500 employees. . councillor McHattie and myself were part of the McMaster steering committee in house brainstorming group. I chair the liaison committee with all departments represented. We meet monthly. This process is really leading up to a new set of Official Plan policies . being coordinated with the Kirkendall neighbourhood master transportation plan." No recommendations or decisions required, but looking for input. "Besides being a financial partner with McMaster, the city of Hamilton is committed to this project. We have put up $5 million to have McMaster." Actively involved in marketing efforts. Introduces Nick Markettos from McMaster who introduces Donald Schmitt, head of the architect team. "Just to give some indication of what an Innovation Park is, it's a place where industry, government and researchers from universities work together. They collaborate to try and extract the economic value of the research that universities and industry are doing. Therefore it provides an opportunity for partnerships that stimulate job creation and prosperity in the region. In the way of chronology, I just want to say that the property was purchased in January of 2005 . The city of Hamilton . provided a $5 million grant and the province of Ontario provided a $10 million grant. Demolition started in June 2005. In August the federal government announced the relocation of the Canmet laboratory - this is the materials technology research lab which will be about 150,000 square foot of lab and office space at the site. And General Motors . announced that they will be locating the GM Centre for corrosion engineering research at the Innovation Park . . In September we engaged the team of Diamond Schmitt and others to develop a master plan, and you will hear more about this in a minute. We've also had three open houses to tell the community what we are doing. . and we received very positive feedback and the community is very excited. . working closely with city staff to make sure everything is moving forward."

Donald Schmitt [architect with Diamond Schmitt]: introduces colleague Robert Graham working with him on the project. Powerpoint presentation. "The site is a 37 acre site bisected by Longwood - originally the industrial plant of Westinghouse and then the Camco industries . purchased by the university a little over a year ago. The site really has spectacular access to the highway infrastructure, the highway 403. It is also quite close to the Kirkendall neighbourhood and the sort of changing patterns of activity to the east in the Kirkendall neighbourhood. And as well is bounded to some extent on its eastern edge by Chedoke Creek and some of its ravine lands. So it's got visual prominence, good service access, and is really the opportunity to revitalize a brownfield industrial site and convert it into a 21st century innovation park. . The plan of the park is essentially showing Longwood bisecting the lands. This is the existing Camco building - a four storey, very robust masonry building about 190,000 square feet in area which will be retained and renovated and revitalized as part of this project. And what's shown in general terms is first of all a loop street - a new street that will be created and forms a connection at two new intersections on Longwood - one signalized intersection and one non-signalized intersection that provide access to a series of building sites that can be developed over time for research uses, for academic uses, for private sector partnerships between the university and innovation and private sector activities. The street structure also allows access in the future to a connection that might bridge across Chedoke Creek to Frid Street , so it is designed to facilitate that possibility in the future. But effectively the street is a way of opening up a lot of sites for development coherently within the park as a whole . One of the ambitions of McMaster in the park is to ensure that this is from an environmental sustainability is really state of the art, that it really represents the leading edge of design and site development opportunites for managing stormwater, for utilizing landscaping and green design principles to the maximum extent possible to make this leading edge in that regard. Secondly the park is designed to engage the landscape as much as possible. You can see this major central park which bisects the site. As Longwood runs in a north-south direction, this park in an east-west direction provides a major focal point for those who are working in the park and provides visual connection back to McMaster University , just as we have great sightlines towards the escarpment and surrounding infrastructure through the street configuration. The third element, in addition to sustainability and the importance of landscape, is to really ensure that this is not only a campus or an innovation precinct in the traditional sense, but that it is really a 24-hour neighbourhood that provides amenities, retail activity, daycare, fitness opportunities - that it really is a holistically-designed neighbourhood that provides a great place to live and work on a 24/7 basis. And to that extent, there's retail opportunities incorporate at grade along Longwood Avenue, that there are opportunities for park space, not only as I pointed out here, but gathering places throughout the park, that there are stormwater management ponds that are integrated as landscape features in key and prominent locations in the park and that parking is managed in a very controlled way . the streets are being heavily planted with trees, provided with bike lanes and good pedestrian environment - all of which is to ensure that this is a highly sustainable neighbourhood for research and development. . you see the Camco building restored and renovated, a new public square and open space south of Camco. The central park which is a key focal point of the master plan, and effectively four stories of development as a maximum through the facility, equipped with green roofs to be part of managing stormwater and reducing the heat island effect for the buildings as a whole. . the existing power plant that was part of the Camco site retained and restored as a museum of industrial archaeology on this site and in the neighbourhood, and the central park here with stormwater features bisecting the park and crossing Longwood, and the disposition of buildings around with street access and address around all parts of the street. What's also shown here is the possibility of development to improve Longwood for cycling and pedestrian access and the potential for beacons or markers on the bridge in order to identify the site along highway 403 and sort of recall the pylons at the high level bridge just farther down highway 403 . the improvements on Longwood which maintain the existing four lanes of arterial traffic with turning lanes at the intersections but also dedicated cycling lanes, on street parking for convenience to really make this a great urban boulevard, trees and a generous sidewalk which really make this a great pedestrian and urban environment. . we've taken advantage of the topography. This is a cross section with Longwood here sloping off to highway 403 on the left and sloping down to Chedoke Creek, and we're taking advantage of that topography - both to allow easy access to below grade parking to service all the research and private sector buildings, but also to assist in managing stormwater on the surface of the site. And similarly, a cross-section from highway 403 on the left hand side of the drawing looking along Longwood toward Aberdeen on the right hand side. The only building that is higher than the four stories is the potential for CanMet, a division of the National Research Council which has signed an agreement in principle with McMaster to move from Ottawa to this site in the near future. . These are just some of the streetscape sections . we've been working with city staff to incorporate this streetscape design into the master plan in order to ensure that we get high quality urban boulevards - so 4 lanes of arterial traffic, dedicated cycling lanes, on-street parking, lots of street trees and lots of space for pedestrians. So a cross-section along Longwood that truly has the potential to turn it into a great urban boulevard. The side streets are two lanes of traffic but with the same cycling and pedestrian amenities. Stormwater - this diagram the required area to manage all the stormwater on the surface. So rather than divert stormwater into the sewer system, our intent is to manage all of that and really use stormwater on the surface as an amenity and a key asset in the landscape plan. . stormwater ponds which become part of the recreational and landscape aesthetics of the plan as well as a water course which takes advantage of the topography to clean and polish water and remove contaminants on the surface as part of the open park space ... phasing is planned so that the first phases will involve the renovation and development of the existing Camco building. There are already a significant number of tenants, both academic and private sector, who have an interest in this building. And currently we're looking at the costing, planning for the renovation of this building. And then it's anticipated that the next phases of development will occur to the north on the Canmet site, which requires a fairly significant material handling and parking access, as well as a four storey site for development to the south. This is for the short term the existing warehouse that McMaster has leased out on the west side of Longwood and plans to maintain in the short term. So its' a simple phasing of moving from the sort of centre of activity, moving to the south, with the street introduced after the demolition of the next warehouse and the emergence of new buildings as we move on the east side of Longwood, moving south. So you can see the kind of phasing as it moves in over a period of perhaps 20 years. Parking . is a combination of surface lots which are relatively few in number, which are shown in the south east and south west corners and on the northeast corner which is associated with the Canmet site. But in principle, most of the parking is managed below grade, taking advantage of the topography, in each building as the site expands. . we've had a comprehensive team that includes traffic engineering and we've looked at detailed studies of the traffic volume and so forth, and effectively have at highway 403 and Main the peak capacity to absorb the additional utilization of that intersection, but at Main West and Longwood, and Longwood and Aberdeen, which are currently operating at about 90% utilization, over time in the kind of 5 and 10 and 20 year horizon, as the park expands, we will need to consider improvements to those intersections to allow for additional capacity as the park expands, but not a requirement in the near term. Finally, I mentioned the Canmet, which is a division of the National Research Council that operates in Ottawa , has signed a letter of understanding with McMaster to relocate about 90 of their senior staff and roughly 120,000 square feet of research space which is devoted to materials research. They are extremely interested in this site because of its proximity to the steel industry. A lot of their work is high pressure pipelines. And the automotive industry, and they're very interested in materials development and some of the partnerships that they can engage in. So they're keen to move, so they're currently facilitating that development. . This is the Camco building, which as I mentioned is proposed for renovation. The interior of what was the lab building on the east side of that building, there's a very robust steel structure and this shows the plan for the introduction of an atrium in that space to link all five floors together - four floors above and a basement level that opens to the east. Link those by a stair, fill that with a café and support services on the ground floor and really have a multi-tenanted building that is a combination of academic users, potentially Mohawk College , as well as private sector users in a sort of mixed use research and development facility. And this is the plan and view of the Camco building on its south edge with Longwood in the foreground which shows the building at dusk, with the windows opened up for new activity and the open space, café open onto that space, a new square. And currently we're putting together costs and the detail of moving forward with this plan. We have an animated walkthrough . a digital flythrough of the whole." Asks for questions [ 1:44:33 ]

Kelly : ". this certainly is great news and good to see things progressing. As we talk about our economic development policies, certainly this Innovation Park is one of the lynchpins of that and we are very much looking forward to not just the impact of the Park itself, but the long term impact it's going to have on the community too. One of the main elements of this is . the Canmet materials lab with its relocation. And you did mention that you have an agreement in principle with Canmet. We tend to talk about things in political circles around this table, and one of the stories that has surfaced over the last little while is a couple of the newly elected members of Parliament from the Ottawa area are making a stink about Canmet leaving that city and coming here. This was done under the auspices of the previous government, and I guess the question is quite frankly, you have a commitment, you may have one from Canmet, but do you have a commitment from the current federal government on this? We in this community, without getting into the politics of it, had a newly elected government in the 1990s that decided to renege on funding for a major project in this area, and I think we're still feeling the effects of that. I'd hate to think that a new federal government might want to do the same thing. Have you had discussion with the federal government about Canmet, and is there consensus and is there support from the new federal government for this move?" Markettos : "Yes. We're in the process now of touching base with the senior bureaucrats in Ottawa , assistant deputy ministers, deputy ministers, as they are preparing their briefing material for the new government. The member for Parliament here, David Sweet, has been briefed on that and preliminary indications are that there's not going to be any change in the course of the government has taken to relocate Canmet. We don't know for sure, but all signs are positive. There was a slowdown because of the election, but things are moving again now and we are very optimistic that there will be no change in course." Kelly : "I know the former industry minister, Mr Emerson, is very supportive of it, and since he's changed horses maybe I suppose you've still got that support. He's still a tory today isn't he? I haven't seen the paper this morning. If there is any change in that, I hope that you bring it to our attention. If there's any political leverage that we could offer, we'd certainly be there for that. Thank you."

Bratina : ". Hamilton is a city of heavy industry and I wonder if there are potentially heavy industry research applications. I know metallurgy and so on. Is it a blank piece of paper or do you have a sense of how these facilities may evolve in terms of what may end up filling those spaces." Markettos : "There are two aspects. One is biosciences and biotechnology and that is more than 50% of the research that McMaster is doing currently. So we see that as being one .. The other is advanced materials manufacturing and we were told all along as we were planning this park that if you can get a major anchor tenant in the park then others will come. Dofasco and the steel industry are looking at that - you know the collaboration that they have Canment and McMaster as they service the auto industry. And when we talk of manufacturing, or materials and metals, a lot of this is very very advanced. You have some very sophisticated equipment. You know they are not the labs of the 50s and 60s so when you walk through it, you won't be able to tell the difference, whether it's a materials lab or an electronics lab or some other thing." Bratina : "I noticed that there is a rural spur that comes off the Aberdeen yard and crosses and it doesn't show up on any of the documents. So is the plan to abandon that rail spur?" Schmitt : "The rail spur . that's really not part of our property so it extends beyond the McMaster lands so we really don't have control over that, but I think there is a possibilty in the future, as CP may be changing their views on what they're doing with the lands immediately to the east of the ..property on the other side of the Cootes, but that circums tance may change." Bratina : "But the old warehouse on the west side has a rail spur that they used to ship." Schmitt : "Oh, on the west side [ 1:49:35 ] Markettos : "That is there now. We are not touching the warehouse for at least three years, so we will make that decision later. We don't see a need for it for our park." Bratina : "I understand that, but I want to caution you against removing the railway line because currently in our new employment lands and industrial parks we remove the rail spurs, so now we have no potential for automobile manufacturing because those are typically shipped by rail. And also there is a lot of advanced research done on locomotives and railways, and Hamilton has an historical connection there, so think carefully before you lift those rail lines. And finally, I spend five days a week at that site, so I know it pretty well, and underneath the parking lot there's some mention of archaeology and history. I understand that all the seconds of the Westinghouse tubes were just dumped and then covered over, so there may be some great old electronic tubes underneath the subsoil. So it would be nice to pull some of those out for the proposed museum. Obviously we're all excited about this and can't wait to see it advanced."

McHattie : ".great working with Innovation Park steering committee . tremendously creative group . all kinds of transportation issues that we still need to work on with our Kirkendall neighbourhood transportation study, in particular the bike lanes along Longwood - they need to connect to something as they come off the site and off McMaster territory, so we need to think that through right now. That's not all that clear as to where the bike lanes will go, but I can say that during the discussions we spoke about the CP Aberdeen Yard across the other side of Aberdeen and we've had some positive feedback from them recently for extending a bike lane through the yard and connecting up the radial line that's along the escarpment with the rest of the rail trail that heads out by Fortinos and Rifle Range Road, which is a trail. From there on it goes right through to Brantford . We've had some encouraging discussions with them to make that link for the city to look at putting a bike facility in there. Again the challenge would be to get across Aberdeen by the railway bridge and all kinds of issues there but to connect to the McMaster property . the 403 and Aberdeen entranceway, it is a gateway, it will be a gateway to the Innovation Park, and I just wonder if there has been more discussion or thoughts on how to treat that gateway . we need to work with CP on that . and we've had some great cooperation with them recently . willing to pick up on that."

Schmitt : "I think it's an important opportunity. I mean at the Longwood and 403 we've seen that as a very key gateway facility . there's a possiblity at Aberdeen and the 403 for a kind of similar gateway . would require a partnership with CP, but I think it's an excellent idea. We haven't really developed that yet . we will work on that and develop that. I mean the sort of escarpment edge of the land presents as you come off 403 up onto Aberdeen, you know gives some really great landscaping possibilities as well, because it's such a great landscape corridor along the 403 that we need to continue and enhance that ." McHattie suggests putting on the agenda of the CP advisory committee "just to open discussions".

Mitchell asks about "the agricultural side" Took course at Guelph and "everybody in that class said the future of agriculture will bring medical research with it and we'll be able to grow crops and food that will help the medical industry immensely . now I see all the green roofs that you've got going on there and I see you correlate those to storm drainage. Well I don't want to look at green roofs for storm drainage. I want to look at green roofs for agricultural research and for plant research . a big part of Hamilton . is 65% is agriculture and you have the highway access, you have the ability for the people to get back and forth, and get to the rural area to be experimenting as well, joint ventures with University of Guelph, that's my background . that impresses me, all the green roofs, and I think that's the future of what we have to do more of." Markettos : "One of the organizations that will be located there is the Golden Horseshoe Biosciences Network . involves Brock University as well as McMaster. And Brock has been doing a lot of research of phytopharmaceuticals . the park would be open for all those suggestions. Those are excellent ideas. We just have the players there to do the work." Mitchell : ".will it be mandated that that roof structure that type of building that's available have to have this as part of it, as part of the development?" Schmitt : "The short answer is yes. . As part of the design guidelines for the buildings is to first of all to ensure from a servicing and construction point of view that they have the capacity to deal with a whole range of research, from materials research to life sciences research to agricultural research, that these buildings are designed to embody that possibility . Secondly, that the roof structure is provided with a growing medium and is designed in terms of water and structural capability, that you can use the roofs for growing certain plants, whether it's green roofs stormwater management component but also to deal with agricultural research . that's provided for in the design guidelines for the buildings."

DiIanni : offers congratulations on presentation and work. "This truly is an exciting project and a transformative project for the city of Hamilton . And I want to underscore that because in the details that have been mentioned so far, we maybe lose sight of the bigger picture and the impact of what this McMaster Innovation Park will do for the city, the downtown and the whole city as well of course McMaster and the research that will be carried out here. And hopefully the commercialization of that research as well. . I think one of the better decisions we made as a council last term of council was in partnering with Mac on this project and actually contributing some millions of dollars - I can't remember precisely, was it $5 million? - towards this park. And I think that partnership augers well. . Canmet was mentioned by councillor Kelly and I'm pleased that we have agreement in principle. I know that the previous government actually approved through Treasury Board and all the regulations for that to happen, and I look forward to that being finalized at the earliest opportunity. I guess my question then is, with regards to the marketing of this park. And I'm not sure what our role is as a city, and maybe Neil [Everson] who is here and can speak to this, or maybe you can speak to this and whether joint or who we're talking to and how we'regoing to talk to people. Do we need to put things in place? And I know there's a committee that's looking at some of these initiatives, but I'd certainly be interested in ensuring that our city did whatever we could to give momentum, or to contribute to the momentum of this particular project."

Markettos : "This park is really a partnership between McMaster, the City of Hamilton , the provincial government and the federal government, so we need all the players together to work together and market the park. We are working with the city and the economic development department in developing some preliminary marketing material for the Canmet staff. Canmet have asked us to give them information on quality of life, housing, schools, those types of things. So we are already working with the city staff on that . we expect the same material will be used for marketing the Park to others .."

Everson : "We are also doing joint marketing and advertising with McMaster and together we'll be participating at the Bio 2006 trade show in Chicago marketing the park at the same time. It's the largest Bio show in the world."

Pearson also praises presentation and staff "for a tremendous job". "It's a phenomenal vision for future Hamilton and as a resident who's grown up within feet of this property it will truly be an extraordinary event when it all comes together."

Committee received the presentation. [ 2:02:34 ] 42 minutes on this item

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL (in camera from 11:40 am to 12:00 am )

12.1 Verbal update regarding a matter which is presently before the Ontario Municipal Board

Inserted into the agenda at this time to accommodate legal counsel. Twenty minutes in camera. Topic was Stoney Creek Urban Boundary. A motion was adopted but was not read out. It was printed in the official minutes as follow:

Stoney Creek Urban Boundary Expansion (Item 12.1)

That the City of Hamilton request the Ontario Municipal Board to further amend Amendment No. 99 to the Stoney Creek Official Plan respecting two areas described as,

(i) north of Barton Street, east of Winona Road, south of the CNR railway tracks, and

(ii) west of Fifty Road and the lands between the CNR railway tracks , Winona Road, the South Service Road of the QEW, and the Hamilton municipal boundary,

to add a new clause, clause ( c) to Policy A.12.6 as follows:

c) Notwithstanding Policy A.12.6 a) above, one separate integrated Class Environmental Assessment/Secondary Plan may proceed for all the landholdings in the areas described as north of Barton Street, east of Winona Road, south of the CNR railway tracks and west of Fifty Road and the lands between the CNR railway tracks, Winona Road, the South Service Road of the QEW, and the Hamilton municipal boundary, as identified on Schedule "A", provided that:

i) a Terms of Reference for the integrated Class Environmental Assessment/Secondary Plan is reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement; and,

ii) all costs related to the Class Environmental Assessment/Secondary Plan shall be paid for by the proponents.

Beginning of Part Two of the tape

7.2 Hamilton Downtown: Heritage Character Zone, Design Guidelines (PED06076) (Ward 2)

Staff presentation provided by Al Fletcher. Bruckler asks about "permissive language" in the "guidelines". "Is this more of a way of encouraging and urging as opposed to strict rigidity". Fletcher says it is a guideline and gives flexibility on how development occurs. But "in the future if the legislation for Bill 51 does change and gives municipalities additional powers in regards to architectural design and urban design, these guidelines through consultation with the public can be adopted and then can be adhered to with new development applications as they come in."

McHattie asks why they are recommending avoiding replication of historical architectural styles. David Cuming : ".each era contributes a building style and building materials and a whole variety of ways of building. I think it's very easy to fall into a position of, it's an easy way out to say well everything has to look like a Victorian style piece of architecture from the 1890s. I think it's important to understand the downtown is a dynamic area. We are going to be faced with change. And it's important to ensure that when change does occur, it does fit it well, but not necessarily trying to replicate historical facades that we wouldn't normally build in. So we are looking at hopefully providing design professionals with the greatest flexibility in being able to contribute something from this era - from 2006-2007 onwards - that we can point to quite proudly and say this is what we contributed in the 21st century. . A lot of the character of the area does derive from historical buildings, but I don't think that means we have to build our buildings that look like Victorian architecture." McHattie: "One of the reasons I asked was with the redevelopment of the Kit-Kat building on King Street which the city is undertaking - City Housing Hamilton - we paid particular attention to try and replicate some of the heritage aspects . it seems to be a little bit contrary to that. I still don't understand why we wouldn't do that. . we could talk about a heritage conservation district which would be much stricter . and that's what Burlington tried to do and backed off from. . I'm just curious why we're explicitly making those comments . I still remain quite surprised by that approach."

Bratina : "I appreciate these are guidelines, but I do want to acknowledge staff's sensitivity and understand of what Hamilton's downtown has been and can be by combining historical elements with future developments, but not necessarily being exclusionary in some overriding way. But I am wondering . what's the potential to see something startling in terms of architecture downtown rather than simply sort of carrying on with that Victorian streetscape?" Cuming : "I think it's important to realize that this character area is a smaller portion of the downtown and what we're trying to suggest is that obviously this area has a particular character and feel - lots of commercial terraces where infill and new development, if it is not sympathetic, could do visual harm to the downtown. I think we recognize that there are areas around the character areas . where there's a lot more flexibility. If you think of the downtown there lots of individual buildings placed on quite spacious grounds. I'm thinking of the old courthouse, some of the churches - so I think that's the area, around these character areas, where there's going to be a lot more flexibility where we're can see exciting design that doesn't necessarily have to be directly sympathetic to existing built forms." Bratina : "Well I know we can't turn back the clock, but I sort of wish this was 1966 instead of 2006 and we could have righted some wrongs. Thanks for this great report."

Staff recommendation approved. [ 15:25 ]

7.3 Our Downtowns & BIAs - 2005 Annual Report&2006 Downtown Renewal Division Work Plan (PED06073) (City Wide)

Staff presentation by Ron Marini summarizes five year review information in lengthy staff report (see link above). $145 million in building activity over the last five years in downtown Hamilton . Residential building permit values - "more important for us, because council's principle strategy is to create housing downtown to create life and vitality" - five years $49 million, about $10 million a year, last year $11 million.

(22 minutes for this item)

DISCUSSION ITEMS

8.1 Hamilton Business Ambassador Program (PED06045) (City Wide) - Referred from Planning andEconomic Development Committee on June 7,

(7 minutes for this item)

8.2 Application to Amend City of Stoney Creek Zoning By-law No. 3692-92 for Lands Located at 341 Regional Road 20 (Stoney Creek) (PED05201) (Ward 11)(Referred back to Committee by Council on December 14, 2005, then tabled for one month by Committee on February 7, 2006)

[from minutes] Councillor Mitchell explained that he had been working with the applicant regarding solving the on-site problems. However, there has not been a resolution, so he proposed that Committee consider a revised staff recommendation, to approve the zoning application subject to the imposition of an 'H' Holding provision. Committee approved the revised recommendation. (3 minutes for this item).

8.3 Policy and Guidelines for the Renting and Demolition of Residential Buildings Owned by the City of Hamilton (PED06077) (City Wide)

(12 minutes on this item)

8.4 2005 ERASE Redevelopment Grant Application (ERG-05-01) - BIOX Canada Ltd, 41 OliverStreet (PED06037) (Ward 3)( Tabled for one month by Committee on February 7,2006)

8.4.1 ERASE Redevelopment Grant Application (ERG-05-01) - BIOX Canada Ltd., 41 Oliver Street (Ward 3) - Referred from Planning and Economic Development Committee of February 7, 2006 (PED06037(a))

[ 1:00:14 ] Pearson introduces the item. Introduces staff Carolynne Reid and Neil Everson. Reid : "Nothing in addition to the report other than question 3 that was put forward to staff - the damages on the neighbouring site. I've heard from the Hamilton Port Authority that the Hamilton Port has hired an independent third party adjustor to assess the damages. They're in the process of compiling the report. They have met with the residents and the report is forthcoming."

Merulla : ".I think it should be connected to the outstanding issue, is that we table this until that report comes forward, so that we can move forward on ensuring that the residents are dealt with prior to these monies being granted. And that's moved by myself and councillor McHattie."

Pearson notes there are two approved citizen speakers. Committee agrees to hear them.

Al Lehman : ".I live at 12 Oliver Street and I moved there in 1959. It's been a good neighbourhood. We've had baseball diamonds there and the park there for kids and swings and that, but now we've got a biodiesel chemical plant in front of us and a lot of damage to our houses. And I'll say just a few words on behalf of the people of Oliver Street .. Some of these damages were caused on pre-construction - on the demolition. And according to this report from the last meeting, they didn't need a professional engineer to demolish these buildings because it was just one small building they said, Kingsway Transport. But there was another large building on the end of Wentworth Street , on the property, right beside the harbour commission building, that is about three stories high - a big large steel building. And they demolished that. They did all the deconstruction work during the day, but at night when it was dark, they pulled it down. And that building was used for coal dust, and all that coal dust went all over the neighbourhood of Land Street . So I think they should have had a professional engineer to tear those buildings down, and maybe the damage wouldn't have happened to the rest of our houses. At the very start of this - the second meeting with the Port Authority - we suggested that they possibly buy these houses out. This is built in front of my house - 69 yards from my front door a biodiesel plant. I don't think that's very fair. It was a park, a baseball diamond, and everything. But if they're not going to buy them out, definitely listen to the councillor here, I think they've got to fix these houses up. After your last meeting here, within three days we had an adjustor come through and look at it - looked at three houses - and we've never heard back from them since. So whether we're going to be looked after or not, I don't know. Speaking for the residents of Oliver Street , only about 3 houses were inspected. They never came down and did any more."

Bratina : "What would it take in terms of what you have invested in your house. You mentioned buy us out. Would that be something the residents would seriously consider?" Lehman : "We have a letter - well the lady has moved away - but she had a letter . she was doing all the talking for us at some of the meetings. And we all signed this piece of paper that everybody would sell out, if they bought, if they were willing to do it.To get out of there. Because we are scared about what's going to happen across the road. I'll give you one instance why we are scared. We were sitting there one afternoon - and this was in construction - and they had a fire there. Four fire trucks came down from Wentworth and Barton Street , and they couldn't hardly get along the street because the cars were - we park in front of our house, and all the construction people were parking on the other side of the street. The fire trucks couldn't by. And they got to the gates, and the gates were locked. They couldn't even get in. They put their own fire out. It was an electrical fire. Now we have a notice handed to us yesterday that they're going to start testing their fire alarm for seven days. Everybody will sell out. There's only 10 houses on the street."

Brenda Johnson : "Back again. This is a very convoluted situation and I commend any of you if you can sort this out. I've been involved in this situation for almost a year and I'm still getting all the pieces in place. The one thing that I wanted to address mostly with you today is the demolition practices in Hamilton . This is not site specific. This is going on throughout the city. And the reason we know that is that you're getting your calls into your council office and you're referring the calls to us. We've got two calls right now that have come in. So I'm coming back to you to ask you for help. What happens is, they get on site, they pull these buildings down, they raise these great big huge concrete slabs, let them drop onto other concrete slabs, and they create aggregates on site. It's not a good practice, especially when you're in 50 and 60 year old homes. This site in particular started off with the damage, from what I understand. The damage started during the demolition process. And like a crack in your windshield, it just got exacerbated by the construction that happened afterwards. So we have this initially done to the homes. Assumedly it happened from the demolition crew. And now construction started. There was a manhole cover on this property that was probably about 18 increase to 2 feet above the ground. They have to put the gravel down to come up to that level to make it flush. These are 18-wheelers that are going to be driving on this lot. They can't just throw the gravel down and spread it around and then leave. What they did is they put it down every three inches and then pounded it into the ground to resolve any landfill issues. What we were getting was phone calls from Niagara Street . And Niagara Street 's a couple of blocks away and they were feeling the vibrations. I can't imagine what these people on Oliver Street were feeling. Al was telling me that he had to replace the damage done to his roof because all the nails had started to loosen off. We've got people complaining about basements that are flooded. It's getting absolutely ridiculous. And I've noticed that you've passed a couple of demolition permits today. I'm wondering if you're also thinking what I'm thinking. What adverse effect is it going to have on the rest of the area, especially in these urban areas? The ERASE program is a good program in theory. This applicant is asking for funds for site preparation upgrading and for demolition. Almost $150,000 worth. Are we prepared to reward the company that maybe responsible for the damages done to these homes. The damage is so bad it's leaving these homeowners with some dilemmas on their hands. Do they sell and unsaleable home? Do they stay and try and fix up what they have? There's also an issue too here that we're really not too sure about. It's this owner-tenant situation. We have the owner who is the Hamilton Port Authority lands, and yet you have a tenant who's asking for the money. And in the agreement it says that the tenant - er the owner - the get the money as long as they keep the site clean. Well, is the tenant prepared to take the money, and then the owner is going to promise to keep the site clean? And yes there is possibilities of site recontamination because it's all done because of human error. And human error is rampant around everywhere that there is contamination. We have a Bitumar plant over one Eastport Drive. It's a state-of-the-art asphalt making plant. 8000 litre spill last year. Why? Because a valve didn't get shut off. So these things are not done intentionally. We never would presume a company would do it intentionally. But we're asking what reassurances do these residents have that human error has been taken to the very possible extent? Are we going to ask for performance bonds, that this company can operate in good faith? It's a brand new company. It's never been done before. So why not ask for some reassurances for the residences? At the very least, we're asking for the bare minimum. We're asking the city to use their good offices to ensure that these residents' concerns get met - damages to their homes, recontamination, and just quality of living."

Lehman : "Right now it's winter time and I'm sitting in the living room watching TV and they have a cooling tower there, and it runs for eight minutes about every half hour. I don't know whether they're producing yet, or just testing, but when that cooling tower comes on, in the living room it affects you watching television. Now in my next room is my bedroom. And what that comes on in my bedroom at 4:40 am in the morning, it just woke me right up - right awake. My concern is and my neighbours concern is, when the summertime comes, and the doors are open. We want some fresh air into the house, it's going to be a lot more noisier than what it is now. And they were told to build a sound barrier wall. And they did. But it's just as noisy. It hasn't helped at all."

Merulla : "So the motion we have on the floor at this point - earlier - I want to speak on another issue. Just to elaborate about this issue of the Port Authority, and the frustrations surrounding this. Most recently, those of you who are familiar with Pier 8, it's something that we as a council have designated as a priority. The Port Authority has a ship parked out in front of this pier, and based on their arrangements with the city, that in itself deems it to be that that's an active pier for them. The reality of the situation is that they're not active at that pier. So I'm negotiating with this and they have the gall to suggest that they're going to give us back our own pier, if we the city paid to compensate those residents. And this was discussed at a committee meeting. I just can't believe for the life of me that we're even in this situation. . We don't want anyone to go back and negotiate anything. We're saying directly to them - not a cent will flow until these residents are compensated. At which time, then perhaps the money will flow. Until then, we're not going to entertain this application whatsoever."

McHattie : ".following up on the comments from the speakers, it's certainly concerning that the demolition procedures are being carried out the way that they are, and the suggestions that this is occuring elsewhere across the city as well. So I'd like to follow up on that piece, and understand better what our demolition policy and procedures consist of, and ask staff to investigate these other situations that are occurring, and whether in fact its perhaps even standard procedure for this aggregate creation approach to be undertaken across the city. So that's maybe a request I can make to staff, and I won't necessarily need a motion on that, but to come. We really need them to come back to us with that situation. In fact, maybe it should be a motion just so it comes back to committee and it's all recorded and everything. So I'll move that, seconded by councillor Mitchell. And the other issue is this idea of a performance bond. At some point, this industry will have its construction finalized and be moving ahead, operating as a biodiesel plant. And I'd like to ask staff if we have in the past, whether we have the opportunity, and whether we can in this case, put in place a performance bond that speaks to some of the issues that may arise - as this is a new process that's not well understood - the biodiesel process that's in place."

Everson : "That is not part of the ERASE program. We would have to get a separate legal opinion on whether the municipality could do that or not. McHattie: "Well perhaps if councillor Mitchell's okay with that, I'll add that to the motion that I just put forward, just so we can get an answer on that, on this specific case, whether a performance bond can be put in place for a development such as this - understanding it's not necessarily part of the ERASE program. That's an extra question about the whole thing" Mitchell : "I guess I'd like to know the answer to the question too, and the legalities."

Whitehead : "Just on that, I hope that in the report [1:16:12] that it's not just going to be specific to Biox but the whole concept of performance bonds, pros and cons and the implications of such. And I only ask that because we need to balance everybody's interest in this process, but I just want to make sure that we're not going to create more barriers in getting businesses to come to this community. But we need to have that information. I don't want to take the city off the hook too easily. We had an enclave program, for the very purposes that houses that were found in heavy industrial areas, the city would go out and purchase those homes outright. . create a larger boundary between the heavy industry and the residents. And I believe the enclave program, at least in policy, is still in the books. Can I ask staff if that is still the case." Everson : "To the best of my knowledge, I'm not sure if it's still on the books. I believe the councillor may be referring to the residential enclave program that was associated with the perimeter road. I would have to check with real estate to determine whether it is still in place. We can do that." Whitehead : "And the reason for asking that question, because if we still have the residential enclave at least in policy - and I understand the perimeter road was at least a piece of that, but I know there were many houses bought through that program that had nothing to do with the perimeter road, in fact were located in heavy industrial areas. In the past, there's precedence . and secondly, I believe that we need to get involved with dialogue with the Port Authority on these particular houses that have been impacted by this particular development. .. And that if it's a question of outright purchase, I think we both need to share in that responsibility. If it's a question of damage, then ultimately that's the responsibility, in my opinion, of either the developer or ultimately the Port Authority who owns the lands. So I would encourage further dialogue with the Port Authority on what the overall outcome should be."

Pearson : "We have two motions now. We have the motion by councillor Merulla, seconded by councillor Whitehead. Moved and seconded, all in favour? You need clarification. I'm sorry. Councillor Mitchell did have." Mitchell : " I wanted to. Nature called, Madame Chairman. So I need a little update on what's here. I do know from what's been presented by the presentors in the past, to me the way the demolition took place would not be an acceptable way of doing business. And if we have to, if we issue demolition permits then it should be in the city policy what acceptable policies are. And I think that's why I supported councillor McHattie's concern about that and that's something that I hope we can get fixed in the future. I have supported the Biox plant being there. I think environmentally going into the future that it's something that's necessary - those improvements in diesel fuel quality, and so on and so forth. However, there's other issues here, and I don't want to stop progress in our commercial-industrial parks. So could I just get an update on the motions that were made and where we are going on this?" Pearson : "The clerk was asking for clarification from councillor Merulla on his first motion. So let's have that read out." Merulla : "Just simply put, we have outstanding issues regarding the residential area so until those outstanding issues are resolved, and compensation is granted to the satisfaction of the residents, then no ERASE monies flow to Biox, period." Mitchell : "No, I can't support that." Pearson: "So councillor you are saying if they ask for $1 million for each piece of property." Interrupted by Merulla: "No, no,." Pearson: "But that's what you've left it open to." Merulla : They're the ones coming back saying this is the issue. So they're saying, they're assessing the issue. They're coming back and saying this is what it's going to cost. We're not assessing it, the residents aren't, they are. So they're going to come back. They've already asked the city to pay for this. And obviously the city is now being held hostage based on the Pier 8 negotiations. And here we sit around this table. If we accept the manipulative game-playing of the Port Authority, to the extreme that we've got it, we're rewarding bad behaviour here, madame chairman. I'm not sure how much clearer we can put it. This is a disgrace. We're dealing with some of the most marginalized areas of this city, where neighbourhoods are becoming lifeless, and we have people not only supporting these types of projects, but rewarding them with financial compensation. . a disgrace. Shame on you." Pearson : "Madame clerk, did you get clarification for the whole motion?" Clerk : "Would it be okay if I read you back the recommendation because we have two parts at the end and I'd just like clarification as to which part councillor Merulla would prefer. I've got the Biox ERASE grant be tabled until such time as the report is received back from the third party adjustor and the residents have been appropriately compensated. That was the first part. And then we've had the discussion since then, to the satisfaction of the residents or possibly the satisfaction of council? Council it would be, madame chair." Pearson : "So that you're changing that to the satisfaction of council. Thank you councillor. That I can accept, better. . councillor Mitchell, councillor McHattie, councillor Whitehead?" Whitehead : "In fact, I'm happy with the clarification because you don't want to write a blank cheque either. There needs to be some quantitative way to deal with it and then bring it back to council is the appropriate way." Mitchell : "This is a polite way of saying we want some more negotiations to take place here before we okay the ERASE program funding to go forward, and in its simplicity I guess I understand that and support that in principle. I do want to have some things, we will need to have legal advice and have some things clarified in the future after we get some of this information back. Because I'm a little concerned that we're walking a fine line of passing something today that is going to put us as a city liable, and the taxpayers liable, on a legal grounds. Is there anybody here that can answer that with regards to this motion?" Everson : "Looks like we have direction from the committee. I probably think this is something that you know possible should be discussed with our own internal legal counsel." Mitchell : "Well if this motion is going forward, it looks like it's going to that we have legal advice brought back to us on it as well. Or maybe this should be tabled until we do get legal advice. Maybe I'd be more comfortable with that." Merulla : ".since we're being screwed over by the Port Authority on Biox. . okay. Madame chairman I don't know what level we're going to bring this to, but at the end of the day we have a pretty . You know But think about this for a second. We have a project that first is questionable. We're now rewarding them with taxpayers' money. We're also victimizing residents, through no fault of their own. And we have people looking for excuses to again grant them that money. Does anyone have any understanding of firstly what this might have an impact on that neighbourhood. Secondly, any responsibilities for running the financial component of this to a company that firstly has no legacy in this city whatsoever, and the Port Authority continues to screw us over regularly. So I'm not quite sure why we're being apologists - because I know I'm not. But everyone else can make a decision based on their own judgement." Pearson : "Councillor, I think we've heard loud and clear your position on this. There are some councillors that have supported this project, myself included, and I do have concerns that the legal issues are addressed properly because I'm afraid that we will be back in the situation where we" interrupted by Merulla : "The legal issues of the residents" Interrupted by Pearson : "I . councillor and I don't" Interrupted by Merulla : "What about the residents who you're supposed to be sitting up there and representing?" Pearson : "I don't want to call you out of line, councillor, but I will. And I'm asking that if the motion goes forward, then so be it, but I certainly caution the committee that we should be getting legal advice on this in light of the report and everything that's gone to this point. And if we can get that before council, wonderful. I don't see any reason that it's going to make a - if the report comes back, we still have an opportunity to put your motion forward, councillor. So I leave it up to committee. We have a motion on the floor. Councillor McHattie?" McHattie : "Madame chair, I'll be supporting the motion, but I'd also like to suggest that before we start a huge war with the Port Authority I think that maybe one of us should actually sit down with them at a council level. I'd certainly be interested in. [Merulla speaks off-mic] We have a committee. There should be something. What I'm trying to avoid is simply doing this entirely through motions of council and stuff like that through staff. Staff can only go so far with these kinds of things. Someone should be corresponding at a political level with the Port Authority. If we have a committee to do that, then that's the place that should happen. This should be on the agenda of that - I'm not that familiar with that committee so I'll need some help who that committee is. [Merulla off-mic: "It's myself, Collins, Di Ianni and Kelly]. Okay. So I guess there is a committee for council. [Merulla off-mic again]. In any case, let me just leave it wide open that someone from council should be identified to communicate with the Port Authority on this." Interrupted by Pearson : "Maybe we can ask through the clerk's department. They can find out who the correct source of contact would be as a council representative. [Merulla off-mic] And it maybe through the mayor's office. And that may be the direction." Clerk : "Could I suggest. I can hear the concern of the committee with regard to the legal aspects. Might it be appropriate that this matter be tabled until such time as we have received legal advice and such time as the mayor has been in touch with the Port Authority. That would not negate [off mic comments] Okay [more discussion off-mic including McHattie asking "could we add those things" and Merulla saying: "Okay, let's move on it."] Clerk: My suggestions? Okay. That the matter regarding the Biox ERASE grants be tabled until such time as legal advice has been received and that the mayor has been in touch with the Port Authority, and then the rest of it would flow from there, to talk about the items [Mitchell off-mic]

Mitchell : I don't like doing, making knee-jerk reactions in motions and decisions without having all the information in front of us. Like that's not the way to do business." Interrupted by Merulla : "The things been tabled for two weeks already. Talk about knee-jerk." Interrupted by Pearson : "Councillor, please." Interrupted by Merulla : "I'm not quite sure if" Interrupted by Pearson : "Councillor, I understand. It's getting late in the day and some of us have another meeting after this, but I'd like to get through this agenda, please. We have a tabling motion put forward. Councillor Mitchell, you have a seconder? Councillor Bratina. All in favour? And I will be recorded as in favour of that one too." [off-mic discussion on outcome of vote - it is 3-3 (so it loses) with Mitchell, Bratina and Pearson supporting, and Whitehead, McHattie and Merulla opposed.] Mitchell : "Madame chairman it's a motion to get some information here." Interrupted by Pearson : "That's correct" Mitchell continues: "for council. Like we need this information. Otherwise it's not going anywhere at council anyway. [off-mic comments by Merulla] Like this committee's looking foolish." Pearson : "Okay. We took the vote. I'm going to assume that it was 3-3. All in favour again? Opposed? So it's lost. Councillor Merulla?" Merulla : "Moved by myself, seconded by councillor McHattie that - can you repeat that again, because I forgot what my original motion was." Clerk : "That the Biox ERASE grant be tabled until such time as a report is received from the third party adjustor and residents have been appropriately compensated to the satisfaction of council." Merulla : "Thank you." Pearson : "Moved and seconded. All in favour? Opposed? It's lost." Merulla asks for a standing recorded vote. Pearson : "Certainly. Could we ask for a standing recorded vote. All in favour. [supported by Whitehead, McHattie and Merulla]. Opposed? And I'm standing. [opposed by Mitchell, Bratina and Pearson - motion loses on a tie vote] Pearson : "Thank you. We had another motion that councillor McHattie had that was going to come after this with regards to demoltion reviews procedures." McHattie : "The motion moved by myself seconded by councillor Mitchell that the staff investigate the demolition policy and procedures across the city, and come back to us with a report on that. And the second part is staff investigate the opportunities to place performance bonds on projects such as this and come back to us as well - using Biox as an example, but thinking right across the city on both of those." Pearson : "Moved and seconded. All in favour? That's carried." Pearson asks for direction on the recommendation. Clerk explains there are two reports in front of council, one with a recommendation, and the other just to receive. Pearson : "Moved, seconded by councillor McHattie. All in favour? Carried. . That is tabled to council." Asks Merulla and McHattie to clarify the motion to the clerk. Clerk asks for how they voted on it. It was passed unanimously. [ 1:31:55 ] (32 minutes on this item)

MOTIONS

9.1 To discontinue the Central Hamilton Advisory Committee Approved.

GENERAL INFORMATION s

[from minutes] Councillor Whitehead apologized for his absence from the meeting during the delegation from Pat Harthun. He explained he had been welcoming a group visiting City Hall. Councillor Whitehead thanked staff for their hard work on this complex matter.

Councillor Bruckler raised a question regarding the creation of infill lots and whether this needed a complete subdivision agreement. Mr. McCabe explained that a modified subdivision agreement, which was essentially a servicing agreement, was needed in these cases and offered to work with the Councillor on this item.