Present: Pearson; Mitchell (out 1x for 7 min); Braden (out 3x for 18 min); Merulla (out 7x for 39 min); Kelly (out 2x for 32 min); Bratina (out 6x for 66 min); McHattie (out 3x for 38 min; left at 3:21); Whitehead (arrived at 9:49, out 5x for 29 min)

Also present: McCarthy ( 9:40 to 1142); Collins ( 9:46 to 10:13 ); Bruckler ( 9:48 to 11:42 ); Jackson ( 12:52 to 2:15 ).

Media: Spectator, CHML, Hamilton Community News

CATCH: Don and Joan

DELEGATION REQUESTS

4.1 Anthonyand Janice Tomkins, 4 Thorpe Street, Dundas, respecting parking problems andother associated matters on ThorpeStreet .

4.2 EdFothergill, Fothergill Planning&Development on behalf of the AncasterAgricultural Society, respecting the new Official Plan for Rural Area (Item 8.1of the Agenda)

4.3 EdFothergill, Fothergill Planning&Development on behalf of clients in thePleasantview area respecting the new Official Plan for Rural Area (Item 8.1 ofthe Agenda)

4.4 FredRudolph respecting the Winona Urban Boundary Expansion section of the newOfficial Plan for Rural Area (Item 8.1 of theAgenda)

Numerous additional requests to speak regarding 7.1 and 8.1

CONSENT ITEMS

5.1 AppointmentBy-law under the Building Code Act

5.2 EnterpriseZone Municipal Realty Tax Incentive Grant Program Application for 74 HughsonStreet South/1 Hunter Street East, Hamilton EZ06/03 (PED06342) (Ward2)

5.3 MinorVariance Application DN/A-06:129, 11 ½ York Street (Former Town of Dundas) -Denied by the Committee of Adjustment, (Urban) Supported by the Planning andEconomic Development Department (PED06338) (Ward13)

5.4 Committee of Adjustment (Urban) Severance Application HM/B-06:63 and Minor Variance Application HM/A-06:16, for Property Known as 34 Albert Street, Hamilton – Supported by the Planning and Economic Development Department (PED06348) (Ward 3)

5.5 Declaration of Surplus Property and Sale of 255 West Avenue North, Hamilton, Being Lots 17, 18, 19 and 20 on Plan 286 (PED06352) (Ward 3)

5.6 Request for the Payment of Cash-in-Lieu of Parking for the Property Known as 89 King Street East, (Hamilton) (PED06353) (Ward 2)

5.7 Option to Purchase, 925, 941 and 0 Nebo Road, Glanbrook, for the Dartnall Road Extension Within the North Glanbrook Industrial Business Park (PED06354) (Ward 11)

5.8 Declaration of Surplus Property and Sale of an Easement Affecting City Owned Lands Described as Part 179 Strachan Street East and 367 - 375 Ferguson Avenue North to Union Gas (PED06355) (Ward 2)

5.9 Declaration of Surplus Property of City Owned Lands Described as Part of Lots 153 and 154 on Plan 463, Municipally Known as 226½ Grosvenor Avenue North (PED06358) (Ward 3)

5.10 Hamilton Downtown Residential Loan Program, Increase in Loan Commitments for 47 Caroline Street and 66/68 King Street East and Cancellation of Loan Commitments for 92-112 King Street East and 12 Ferguson Avenue (PED06359) (Ward 2)

5.11 Demolition Permit – 502 Concession Street (PED06343) (Ward 7)

5.12 Demolition Permit – 123 Chesley Street (PED06344) (Ward 8)

5.13 Advisory Committee Minutes – For Information Only

Hamilton LACAC (Municipal Heritage Committee) - Minutes from the meeting held on July 27, 2006

All consent items were approved without discussion.

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DELEGATIONS

6.1 Application for a Change in Zoning for Lands Known as 973-975 Queenston Road (Stoney Creek) (PED06350) (Wards 5 and 9) Proposal for a Pizza Pizza with a patio in an existing small shopping mall at the corner of Queenston and Donn Avenues. Two citizens spoke against – Vicky Sutherland and Maryann Wilson. Councillors Bruckler and Collins also spoke against the application. The mall is partly in each of their wards. No discussion by committee members who voted unanimously to deny the application.

6.2 Applicationfor a Change in Zoning for the Property Located at 11 Lakeside Drive (StoneyCreek) (PED06227) (Ward 11)

6.3 Applications for Approval of a Draft Plan of Subdivision "Timothy's Walk" and Change in Zoning for Lands Located at 205 Queensdale Avenue East (Hamilton) (PED06347) (Ward 7) Proposal for former school property by Frisina Developments Inc. Wants to build seven single-family houses and twenty townhouses with the latter on a private condo lane. Five citizens spoke – four opposed and one supportive. Petitions from both sides, with the pro-petition coming from a nearby school concerned about declining enrolment. Kelly said the concerns raised were real and asked for a two-week deferral to try and reach consensus. Deferred.

6.4 Applicationfor a Change in Zoning for Lands Located at 1286 Upper James Street (Hamilton)(PED06345) (Ward 8) “ The applicant ( Owners: Edward Lorne Richter, Ronald Gary Richter and Lowell Elliott Richter) has submitted an application for a change in zoning to permit the development of a dental office on Block “1” and to permit the future development of single detached residential lots on Block “2”. To facilitate orderly development, staff recommends a ‘H' Holding provision be placed on Block “2” in order to develop those lands with the abutting northerly and southerly lands through a plan of subdivision.” The dental office (block 1) would front on Upper James while the single-family residential would be on Forbes Street . The lands are 26 metres wide and 178 metres deep.

[ 1:46:00 ] Staff report by David Faletta : “…subject lands are located on the west side of Upper James Street, south of the Lincoln Alexander Parkway and north of Stone Church Road East …” McHattie : “…question to staff, probably more for Steve Robichaud or somebody else. It's a larger question. My understanding is that Upper James has been identified as one of the corridors in GRIDS and that we're – my understanding of GRIDS, anyway, although I don't see it at this committee on a week to week basis is that development should be a little bit more dense along the nodes and corridors area, and we want to try to take advantage of transit occurring along those areas. … can you please explain the GRIDS aspect of Upper James and I guess I'm having a hard time understanding the single residential we're recommending here and the dental office where an area is supposed to be along the nodes and corridors area.”

Robichaud : “You are correct in that Upper James as well as Rymal Road have been identified as a mixed use corridor in the GRIDS document. The vision is that those would be mixed uses, both commercial and residential and institutional uses – whether on the same property or in close proximity to each other. And those mixed use corridors would connect a series of nodes, of activity nodes. One of the factors that staff are currently working on for the 2007 workplan is to begin identifying these corridors to start the secondary planning or the land use review in order to come forward with the necessary recommendations as to how to implement that GRIDS strategy in creation of these residential intensification opportunities and these mixed use nodes. So in the interim there will be some development applications, obviously, that will be continuing to come forward. But that's the long term intent, is that these properties do redevelop or provide the opportunities for those mixed use areas and provide a series of nodes strategically located within the city of Hamilton . The transportation master plan is also looking at how to facilitate creation of those nodes, and when that information comes forward it's also an important piece in terms of creation of these corridors as to what sort of land use activities are required along that area. And then the final piece that staff are presently finalizing is the commercial strategy, which will feed into the development of new Official Plan policies to reinforce these corridors throughout the city. And that will take another - and that's one of the items for the work program for 2007 is the development of the Official Plan policies and the associated land use designations for the highway commercial areas to support the corridors and nodes concept.”

McHattie : “Madame chair, just so that I can understand. We receive guidance from staff on matters such as this and here's a case where single residential is being recommended. And GRIDS was passed some months ago now – late spring – so it's been quite awhile. I'm just trying to understand what a recommendation would be from a GRIDS perspective with development such as this. I'd have a hard time understanding a recommendation of single residential, but maybe I misunderstand GRIDS. Can I have some more clarification on that, please.” Robichaud : “Sorry, I think, one of the other sources, or the other element that I forgot to mention was that council also did direct staff to come back in 2007 through the budgetting process with the creation of the brownfields and residential intensification office which would help facilitate this process. Because GRIDS is a long term strategy there will have to be that transition between the time when GRIDS is adopted by council at the end of May and then the necessary changes to both the Official Plan and the zoning bylaw to implement that preferred growth strategy. There are cases where some low density type residences, or lower density residential development will occur during the transition but the recommendation that as we start moving forward we will start seeing more and more of this sort of mixed use development occurring. It will be a gradual transition. That was recognized in our intensification strategy that within the first ten years, that there be a gradual ramp-up towards higher levels of intensification occurring. That was also sort of aligning with the way the growth forecast was structured for the city of Hamilton . But it's just that we are in this sort of transition phrase where we have the old Official Plan policies and documents which sort of had us lay out a vision for some of these areas. And until such time as we move forward with developing those new policies and bringing them forward for public consultation and ultimately council adoption.”

McHattie : “So in these cases, are we just electing to go through missed opportunities?” Pearson : “I thank you for your comments councillor, but I'd like to have Mr Faletta complete the presentation that he was making. David, thank you.”

Faletta : “We'll the presentation was complete, but just to clarify. Forbes Street was recently opened as part of a draft plan of subdivision” interrupted by Pearson : “Councillor if you just want to listen to what he is saying about the road way that's opening, it might enlighten on the issue of the single family residential zone.”

Faletta : “So it was just recently opened as part of this draft plan of subdivision and as such the Official Plan does designate the front portion of these properties as commercial and the rear portion as residential. Now we've placed a holding provision on this portion so that it be developed with both the northerly and southerly properties to address plan of subdivision in accordance with the neighbourhood plan which shows a different street pattern with a cul-de-sac in this area. So it does conform to the Official Plan policies and the neighbourhood plan policies and that's why we're recommending approval.”

Pearson: “Thank you, David, appreciate that.” Asks if applicant is present and supports the staff report. He indicates agreement from the gallery. Pearson then asks for public presentations. None come forward. “Seeing none, I'll close off to the floor. Members of Committee can I have a motion to approve staff's recommendation. Someone? Councillor? Did you wish to comment on this first?”

Whitehead: “Well maybe some comment and some questions. There's been a lot of development in this area in the last number of years, and West 5th – I've brought this issue a number of times – the road is still a rural cross section in this area. We still have bad, badly designed asphalt pathways that are servicing the community access to James MacDonald school, and I'm trying to understand the severance. Are we actually going to be approving a severance here today with respect to single residential?” Faletta: “The severances are already approved. This is a condition of approval.” Whitehead: “A condition of approval for commercial for rezoning? And you're indicating that nothing moves ahead until we get subdivision plans on those other vacant lots?” Faletta: “Correct. The rear portion will have a holding provision placed on it so it can be developed, so it can be consolidated with both the northerly and southerly properties and developed through a draft plan of subdivision – in accordance with the neighbourhood plan.” Whitehead: “And the other thing that I wanted and it's along the same line as councillor McHattie's raised, is that we've got new opportunities here, along Upper James. In fact I wouldn't mind going through a whole secondary plan review of Upper James right from the brow right through to Rymal. I think there's opportunities being lost. There's a lot of pressures on these neighbourhoods, from student housing for example. I'd like to see a secondary plan review to allow, to make it permissible for mixed housing on these commercial lots – make the commercial lots much more viable at the same time providing affordable housing for individuals in the community. The question is where do we put that pressure, where do we apply that pressure without that kind of mixed use?” Faletta: “Well the proposed zoning would permit an array of uses including mixed use. Although it's going into an H zone, the applicant is proposing to place a dental clinic or a dental office on the property. That really, I guess rezones it to a specific use. With the H zoning it's compatible with the commercial designation and like I said would allow a mix of uses. Now in order to do what you're proposing I guess that process would be through a secondary plan. However, I don't know if that is the most appropriate route.” Whitehead: “Can I ask when was the last time a secondary plan has been re-done or reviewed on Upper James? [no one has an answer] There's a challenge and I think we need to take every opportunity we can in development of Upper James. I don't really have a problem with what's in front of us here. I want to make that clear. But again it's one of those lost opportunities when we're really pushing to get more mixed use, leverage more opportunities along this corridor, and we're really missing the boat every time these applications come in front of us. So I would ask one as a direction that staff come back and provide me with reports along that Upper James corridor if there's timelines when those secondary plans were done, how long ago? Are they dated? Do they need to be reviewed? And secondly I would ask on this particular proposal that until we get some information back, I'm going to ask to defer. In fact … only for two weeks, so I can see that information … understand … and see if there is in fact an opportunity to look at more mixed use along these corridors.” Motion is seconded by Merulla and carried. [13 minutes for this item.] [ 2:00:12 ]

6.5 Application to Amend the City of Hamilton Zoning By-law No. 6593 for Lands Located at the Rear of 819 Rymal Road East (PED06346) (Ward 7) Application by Frisina Developments for lands fronting on Eaglewood. Already appealed to OMB because of delay in zoning process, but hearing is in abeyance to allow the city to complete the process. Change is from Agricultural to residential to allow two single family lots.

Kelly concerned about conflict with adjacent land owner but supports application. Fears lands will sit vacant for a long period of time and attract dumping etc. “But just for the record I want to state some very serious concerns about this because the rest of this survey and the rest of this development has moved along progressively and the abutting pieces of land have been incorporated into development, so I'd like to see that happen as soon as possible with this one as well.” No other discussion. Carried. [6 minutes for this item]

Pearson: “…as noted at the start of the meeting before we consider item 7.1 our legal staff has requested that we consider an in camera item listed on the agenda as item 12.1. So do we have a motion to move in camera to consider this item which is presently before the Ontario Municipal Board? Moved by councillor Bratina, seconded by councillor Mitchell. Carried….”

[end of recording of part one of the meeting]

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

Committee went in camera at 11:42 am and emerged at 12:52 am.

See Part #2