text:
Hamilton Street Railway Wants Metrolinx to Extend Dundas Street BRT to McMaster University – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 19, 2021
The Hamilton Street Railway wants Metrolinx to extend its proposed Dundas Street bus rapid transit corridor to McMaster University.
Presently, the HSR does not provide direct service between Waterdown and Hamilton. There is growing pressure for service between Waterdown and McMaster University.
In an email dated July 18, 2019, made public as part of a Planning Act appeal, the HSR’s senior transit planner writes “Maybe Metrolinx could get moving on their Dundas Street BRT (with desired extension to Mac) sooner, rather than later?”
The email discusses transit funding writing “My sense is that Queen’s Park $ for Metrolinx projects are currently scarce.”
The Metrolinx Dundas Street proposal is to operate bus rapid transit from Highway 6 in Waterdown to the Kipling TTC subway station in Toronto.
The business case for the project discusses GO transit buses continuing past the Highway 6 terminus to McMaster University using local roadways in mixed traffic.
Metrolinx continues to work on the planning for the Dundas Street BRT. The estimated capital cost for the project is $600-million. Construction is expected to occur in phases starting in Mississauga with the Waterdown portion in the final phase.

created: November 19, 2021


text:
Joey’s Notes: COVID Makes YoY Comparisons Useless – Library Stats Edition – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 13, 2021
COVID makes data interesting, both in the creation of new useful data and in making routine data useless.
Today’s exhibit: the Hamilton Public Library quarterly circulation stats for April, May, and June.
With libraries completely closed for all but a few days at the end of June 2020, the HPL only lent 6.930 physical items in Q2 last year.
This year (2021), they lent 483,554 physical items – an increase of 6877.7%.
In Q2 2019, the HPL lent 1,342,669 items. Current physical circulation is 38% of the last pre-COVID Q2.
Interestingly, the HPL is reporting around 40% of its pre-COVID foot traffic. It will be interesting to see if in-person traffic correlates with physical circulation numbers in the coming months.
The HPL is reporting a decrease in digital circulation, it remains above pre-COVID levels.

source: news-thepublicrecord

created: November 13, 2021

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Joey’s Notes: The 317 Unvaccinated, Untested City of Hamilton Staff – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 4, 2021
Only in Hamilton.
317 City of Hamilton staff have not declared their vaccination status and decided to not pick up the rapid testing kits available to those who choose to not be vaccinated against COVID-19.
Hamilton’s “Vaccination Verification Policy” does not require vaccination (which other nearby municipalities and transit agencies do), only that staff who do not provide proof of vaccination submit to twice weekly at-home rapid tests (provided by the City).
In a public statement Wednesday afternoon, the City of Hamilton states a large number of the 317 are in the “HSR (5.4 per cent of bus operators), the Hamilton Fire Department (6.1 per cent of suppression employees), and Public Works (6.9 per cent in Waste, 8.2 per cent in Parks and Cemeteries).”
These are front-line “essential” workers who had to interact with the public during the pandemic. In the case of Fire, there was a COVID outbreak at Station 12.
Fire fighters respond to medical calls, the public has a reasonable expectation they are vaccinated against as many communicable diseases as possible.
As for the others, we owe a duty of care to each other to be vaccinated at the present time. It is the only way to control COVID in the short term and ensure enough immunity to exit the pandemic phase of this virus.
It makes no sense to me why anyone would risk their guaranteed well-paid employment by not submitting to rapid testing. To say nothing of a guaranteed pension upon retirement.
If they wish to resist vaccination, the City of Hamilton is allowing them.
The 317 holdouts are now resisting testing, which is even more absurd.

created: November 4, 2021


text:
McMaster and City of Hamilton Have a Deal on Private-Public Student Residence at 1190 Main Street West – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 17, 2021
The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a hearing notice on Tuesday saying the City of Hamilton and Knightstone Capital Management II Inc have reached an agreement to approve a private student residence Knightstone is building in a private-public partnership with McMaster University.
Knightstone and the City of Hamilton both informed the Tribunal in early November 2020 they were very close to a deal. Later in November, McMaster and Knightstone filed a rare OLT appeal against the City claiming the City was refusing to grant site plan approval.
Disagreements between the parties resulted in the “very close” deal not occurring.
“From the conversation, the Member expected a quick resolution of the issue and expected a settlement in short order,” writes OLT Vice-Chair Gregory Bishop of last November’s events. “This was not the case and with the passing of approximately eleven (11) months from the date … the Tribunal Member has now been notified that the issue has been resolved.”
The settlement hearing will be conducted on Wednesday, December 15 by teleconference.
Note: The OLT was formerly known as the Ontario Municipal Board and the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. For ease of reading, TPR refers to the tribunal as the OLT when referring to decisions issued under its previous names.

created: November 17, 2021


text:
OLT Says No to Developer Seeking to Build More Profitable Stacked Townhomes in Waterdown – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 8, 2021
In ruling citing concerns about urban boundary pressures and housing affordability, the Ontario Land Tribunal is denying an application by a Waterdown developer to build stacked townhouses instead of apartments at 157 Parkside Drive.
The owner of the land, LIV Developments Ltd, applied to build 123 stacked townhouses on the site instead of higher-density uses such as apartments which the land is zoned for as part of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (UHOP) and the Waterdown North Secondary Plan (WNSP).
“The provision of affordable housing is an important consideration of the UHOP and apartment-style residential tends to be more affordable,” wrote OLT member Bryan W. Tuckey.
Tuckey upheld the City’s plan for higher density on the site against the developer’s wish to build more profitable stacked townhouses – a form of housing in high demand presently.
LIV Developments appealed to the OLT in March 2020 for non-decision after filing their stacked townhouse plan in December 2016.
City planning staff were not supportive of the plan, there was never a council debate prior to the appeal.
“It is incumbent on the Tribunal to have regard for the City’s position and maintain the existing High Density designation on the subject lands in the face of differing immediate market conditions effectively argued by the Appellant’s Counsel,” the ruling states.
The OLT makes repeated references to the importance of ensuring new development meets density targets for to protect rural areas from urbanization.
“A reduction in a planned high density area and failing to optimize the use of undeveloped lands, potentially compromises the achievement of the City’s vision to be a more sustainable community while having potential impacts on the rural areas of the City,” Tuckey writes.
“Density targets not met within individual neighbourhoods or communities will result in additional pressures being placed on other areas of the City to make up the difference or the need for additional unnecessary boundary expansions.”
The OLT’s mandate requires it to uphold Provincial planning policies and local official plans. In this case, as the local official plans mandate higher density, the OLT is defending that plan.
“Changes to the approved WNSP’s approved structure, no matter how minor, merit a very close and careful consideration.”
The OLT ruling states apartments, while less profitable for developers, are important to ensuring a range of housing choices in neighbourhoods and housing affordability.
“The provision of affordable housing is an important consideration of the UHOP and apartment style residential tends to be more affordable.”
The ruling’s release today comes only one day before Hamilton City Council is scheduled to make a decision on a potential urban boundary expansion.
The ruling will be on CanLII in the coming days.

created: November 8, 2021


text:
Ontario Court Rules Against Injunction, City of Hamilton Plans to Resume Enforcement at Encampments – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 2, 2021
The City of Hamilton can enforce its Parks By-law to remove homeless encampments following a Ontario Superior Court today declining to grant an interlocutory [temporary] injunction against the City filed by five homeless or recently homeless individuals.
The five applicants are challenging the Parks By-Law prohibition against overnight camping and the erection of encampments as a violation of Charter of Rights Section 7 guarantee of the right to “life, liberty and security of the person.”
Lawyers representing them sought an injunction until the Courts hear and rule on the Charter challenge – which is not likely to be heard until at least the middle of 2022.
In a 257 paragraph ruling, Justice Andrew Goodman explained the issue in front of him was the injunction, not the broader societal issues regarding homelessness.
“No reasonable person in Canada would disagree with the proposition that homelessness, wherever and however it occurs, is a tragedy in Canada. However, the narrow issue before me is whether the City’s enforcement of the By-Law should be restrained by court order. It is not a wide-sweeping review of the underlying issue of whether more should be done to help the homeless,” Justice Goodman writes.
“The plight of the homeless, and marginalized members of society continues to be a pressing social, health and resource issue in Hamilton and across this country,” he wrote. “People experiencing homelessness is an unfortunate reality, and many homeless people lived and continue to reside on the streets and in city parks even before the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Following the ruling today, the City of Hamilton issued a statement that enforcement of the Parks By-law is resuming.  The City has a six-step process for removing encampments, and requires the Hamilton Police Service to remove any encampments which do not voluntarily disperse.
In its statement, the Hamilton Community Legal Clinic, which is counsel for the five applicants, states it is “disheartened that the Court considered the desperate act of sleeping in an encampment as a choice. We are concerned that this decision risks perpetuating the stigmatization of the unhoused population. By the City’s own admission, shelters are full and are unable to meet peoples’ disability related needs. This gap often results in people being denied entry or kicked out.
The Clinic adds, “the City must refrain from the aggressive and heavy handed displacement tactics seen in Toronto. It must ensure that people have an actual indoor space option before being told to move along.”
In the ruling, Justice Goodman finds the City of Hamilton is doing enough to provide shelter and support to the homeless population, and that people are not forced to encamp due to a lack of severe shortage of shelter spaces.
He ruled encampments are causing negative impacts upon the broader community, including attracting crime, disorderly behaviour, and some encampments are a risk to public health due to discarded syringes, public defecation, and other problems.
“Overall, there is reliable evidence of criminal activity, nuisance, health and sanitation concerns, illicit drug use and violence at or associated with some of these encampments,” the ruling reads. “There is a strong nexus between the reported crimes and other issues to the fact of the encampments … overall, I am persuaded that these areas of the parks are not safe.”
Justice Goodman distinguished the Hamilton case from cases in British Columbia. The B.C. Courts have granted limited injections to allow for some overnight erecting of tents, and most recently, a single encampment in Prince George.
The B.C. cases involve severe shortages of shelter spaces and encampments on vacant lots. In Hamilton, Goodman finds the City provides sufficient shelter spaces, and the encampments are in parks and green spaces.
The ruling states the applicants failed to show they would suffer irreparable harm from being forced out of encampments into homeless shelters or other options provided by the City of Hamilton.
“All of the named applicants have either received shelter or have been otherwise offered supports, accommodated or declined such overtures. Four applicants are no longer in an encampment,” Justice Goodman wrote. “Based on the record before me and the current status of the five named claimants, I am not persuaded that irreparable harm to these specific individuals arises to the appropriate legal standard and the applicants have not met their onus.”
Justice Goodman writes that shelters are safer environments for people than encampments, that the evidence showed “People sleeping outdoors experience a higher prevalence of medical conditions when compared to those staying in city-funded shelters and the unsheltered experience higher mortality.”
The evidence before the Court included an April 28, 2021 fire at the Kay Drage Park, which involved approximately 30 propane tanks and caused extensive damage. The Court was provided logs of paramedic responses to encampments, including several overdose deaths.
The applicants’ affidavits stated their concerns and fears regarding emergency shelters.
“The applicants’ fears or concerns related to shelters due to COVID-19 or for other stated reasons have been reasonably addressed by the City such that there are some adequate safe alternatives to sleeping in encampments. One is left with a situation where a limited – or even a larger group of people – such as these five applicants, may continue to resist using the shelter system despite the City’s best efforts to accommodate them,” the ruling states.
In the conclusion of the ruling, the Justice repeated comments he made during oral arguments two weeks ago that the Courts cannot make public policy decisions. “This case involves important, complex, and challenging social, economic and policy questions affecting homeless and marginalized members of the community. There are no easy solutions. These issues ought to be left to elected officials, health care and other professionals, social agencies and experts who are best equipped to address the welfare and needs of the homeless.”
The Charter challenge is pending. No dates are yet set for hearings.
Hamilton City Council will discuss the City’s homelessness response and shelter strategy at their Emergency and Community Services meeting on December 7.
[Editorial Note: the decision is not yet on CanLII. I am not posting a copy as search index this website. I do not wish for I do not wish some of the personal details to be the first result for the names of those involved.]

created: November 2, 2021


text:
Vote Against Urban Boundary Expansion Reveals Change in Municipal Politics Power Balance – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 24, 2021
The realignment of Hamilton’s politics played out in Hamilton City Council’s vote against urban boundary expansion.
In the battle between money and organization, community mobilization won.
For as long as anyone can remember, developers have allowed local councillors to posture against their projects when necessary to appease constituents, so long as their interests are ultimately protected and projects approved.
Hamilton City Council’s decision against an urban boundary expansion is a seismic shift. Council voted against the interests of the development industry.
Politically, it represents the power of mobilization, especially considering the influence developers can exercise in the 2022 municipal election.
The factors weighing upon long-time councillors are best illustrated by Ward 6 Councillor Tom Jackson’s sudden change on the issue.
On November 9, he spoke in favour of urban boundary expansion. On November 19, he voted against it.
What changed?
Is Jackson responding to public pressure against boundary expansion, or is this just politics as usual, with Jackson posturing against developers’ interests knowing the provincial government will intervene on behalf of those developer interests?
Jackson is the most consistent representative of the development industry on Council.
He also styles himself the champion of “his” seniors. “His” Ward 6 seniors are broadly represented in the Stop Sprawl HamOnt coalition, which ran a very successful mobilization against urban boundary expansion.
First elected in 1988, he is an astute observer of municipal politics and is aware of what happens when a council gives too much to developers in the face of a city-wide mobilization against development. He knows what happened to Burlington’s City Council in 2018 and Guelph’s in 2006.
Jackson has not indicated either way if he will seek re-election in 2022.
Leading up to Friday’s vote, Jackson repeatedly stated the importance of “choice” as a key reason he supported expanding the boundary.
“With regards to this issue. Number one, my constituents know that I have regularly supported choice for new families to come to our city of Hamilton. I’m lucky to be in a little bungalow. I have my own little piece of this green earth”, he stated on November 9, only a week before voting against the expansion. “Choice and not limiting choice are important to me.”
Jackson also emphasized development industry jobs, suggesting that if Hamilton does not expand the boundary, money and investment will go to other places.
“Nobody even talked about the potential thousands of construction jobs and investment and new taxes that potentially could come to our city by allowing some aspect of the urban boundary expansion through the staff recommendation of the Ambitious Density program.”
Jackson went for the affordability angle as well, “given our scorching red hot real estate market right now for existing sales and resales. I feel we need to provide greater supply to help to ease that.”
In March, during the Council debate on expansion, and using a mail survey to gauge public opinion, Jackson stated, “so there’s no false expectations as to where I’m coming from … if there is no urban boundary expansion … quite frankly, we will be in my humble opinion confined to multi-residential developments existing in our established urban areas everywhere.”
He had moments earlier spoken against intensification.
He also stated, “choice is important as our city moves forward.”
Jackson was seen as a locked-in vote for expansion. It is why he surprised many on November 19 when he stated, “unfortunately, the farmland issue for me, still will be paramount, and why I won’t be able to support option one, the original staff recommendation [to expand the urban boundary].”
What happened?
Many long-time Jackson supporters – “his seniors” – have bcc’d me in email exchanges with Jackson. They are outraged with City Council’s cover-ups and lies. They are looking to vote for change in October 2022.
Many of them are engaged in environmental and climate change movements.
Jackson pays attention when he receives emails from”his” seniors, he especially cares what the residents of the seniors’ apartment building at 801 Upper Gage think.
Municipal councils can be swept out of office by anti-development sentiments. One only needs to look across the harbour at Burlington.
In 2018, its citizens elected a new mayor and five new councillors in a backlash to what the voters perceive as over-development. Only one incumbent was re-elected.
The Great Guelph Wal-Mart Battle of the 2000s shows what happens when a community mobilizes in response to a land use planning decision.
In short, from the mid-90s until an Ontario Municipal Board decision in 2004, Guelph was divided over a land-use planning application to build a Wal-Mart on the north side of the city.
As the Guelph Mercury’s editorial on October 25, 2003, lamented that the Wal-Mart issue dominated the municipal election campaign, to the detriment of issues a municipal council can actually address.
The 2003 election saw a majority of pro-Wal-Mart councillors elected.
Opponents organized and founded the Guelph Civic League in 2004. It focused on mobilizing voters and unseating incumbents.
While the OMB approved the Wal-Mart, and the Ontario Divisional Court upheld the decision, opponents did not go away.
In the 2006 election, Guelph 7 of 12 incumbents seeking re-election were defeated. An eighth incumbent tied with a challenger; the tie was broken by drawing from a random lot with the incumbent winning.
The memory of Guelph 2006 is the stuff of municipal legend, with incumbents continuing to be defeated in future elections. Once smashed, the shield of municipal incumbency is hard to reconstruct.
There is seemingly no incumbent advantage in Guelph anymore.
Tom Jackson will know it well. It is a cautionary tale, primarily due to increased voter turnout motivated to remove incumbents.
[I cannot do the decade-long Guelph Wal-Mart saga justice. For those who wish to learn more, one of the key participants, Ben Bennett, wrote an extensive account in 2016. Adam A. Donaldson did a podcast episode on it in 2016 as well.]
Jackson’s loyalty to the industry is rewarded each election with his campaign collecting more developer money than any other – despite Jackson never facing any serious challengers or needing the funds. (Jackson spends most of his campaign funds on volunteer appreciation gift cards and lavish celebrations.)
Has Jackson been assured that the Ontario Conservative government of Premier Doug Ford will make true on its threat to overrule Hamilton City Council and impose a boundary expansion?
For decades, developer interests have controlled municipal politics. They provide the donor funding and staffing th run the campaigns that elect city councillors. Developers encourage their staff to volunteer on campaigns of candidates who support their interests. [The Municipal Elections Act does not regulate these in-kind contributions.]
Traditionally, municipal politicians have used their piles of developer funding to drown out criticism and highlight issues of interest to voters.
Modern advocacy organizations, including Environment Hamilton and Stop Sprawl HamOnt, can overcome this financial imbalance using digital platforms to build their mailing lists and mobilize voters on issues.
Regardless of what Premier Doug Ford does, the scales of municipal power have tipped.
Today, $30,000 in developer’s money pales in comparison to a list of voters, which numbers in the thousands.

created: November 24, 2021


text:
Who is a “Child” Under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act? – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

November 4, 2021
The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act states a member of a Council or Local Board must recuse themselves of any dealing involving their child.
Child, in the MCIA is defined as “a child born within or outside marriage and includes an adopted child and a person whom a parent has demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child of his or her family”.
In this case, the Chair of a local Committee of Adjustment conducted a minor variance hearing in which the agent, who runs a home building company, is the child of the Chair’s separated partner. Debora Giffin has been separated from her former partner since 2005 but remains legally married to him.
Is this person a “child” under the MCIA?
Integrity Commissioner Guy Giorno analyzes the situation, the first of its kind, and determines he must decide if Giffin ever “demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child” her partner’s child during their marriage.
Giorno determines that while they lived in the same household for seven years, they were never close and Giffin never demonstrated the settled intention to treat as her own child.
The ruling is an informative guide to applying municipal law, family law, and legislative intent to a specific circumstance.
As Giorno notes, the Ontario Legislature has intentionally taken a narrow definition of family interest to only include parents, spouse and children.
Section 3 states: “For the purposes of this Act, the pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, of a parent or the spouse or any child of the member shall, if known to the member, be deemed to be also the pecuniary interest of the member.”
The MCIA does not include grandchildren, nephews, and other people who can be thought of as close relatives.
Prior to 1983, the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act stated “spouse, son, daughter or any other relative of a member of a council or local board who has the same home as such member” and added the present wording for child.
The decision to remove “the same home as the member” and define “child” including the phrase “settled intention to treat as a child” indicates clear legislative intent to not broadly capture all persons in the same household.
“In my view, this deliberate legislative choice is relevant to the breadth of the “child” definition.  The MCIA does not cover the pecuniary interests of a sibling or grandparent, even one who lives in the same home as the member.  The Legislature has chosen a precise, narrow, circumscribed scope.  Consistent the narrow precision of the legislation, it only makes sense that a genuine family connection to the member, not a connection that was tenuous or weak, is necessary to make someone a member’s child under the “settled intention” language,” Giorno writes.
Thus, in this instance where there is no evidence that Giffin ever treated the child as her own, and all parties (Giffin, father, and child) express strongly there was no relationship, Giorno finds:
“While I believe it is possible that C might be considered a “child” of Ms Giffin within the meaning of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, and certainly there are some factors that support that conclusion, I find that the evidence is insufficient to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that C is “a person whom [the Respondent] has demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child of his or her family.”
Being the first case defining child in this context, this interpretation will likely be adopted by other Integrity Commissioners in deciding conflict of interest cases.
Read the full report here: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onmic/doc/2021/2021onmic32/2021onmic32.html


text:
After Provincial Intervention, McMaster Wins Exception from Development Charges for Private Partnerships – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 2, 2021
The City of Hamilton and McMaster University have formally settled McMaster’s appeal of the City’s development charges bylaw as it applies to McMaster’s private-public partnerships to build new for-profit student residences.
The City of Hamilton sought to apply development charges to McMaster’s private partners for the downtown graduate student residence at 10 Bay Street North / 191 King Street West, and was planning to apply DCs at the planned student residence at 1190 Main Street West.
McMaster is turning to private partnerships to build new student residences to increase its ability to house students – especially graduate students who may be offered housing at competing universities – while managing the university’s debt levels.
The Ontario Progressive Conservative government intervened. As part of the government’s 2020 COVID omnibus bills, they amended the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities Act to explicitly exempt private-public partnerships from local taxation.
McMaster is not a Crown agency and was subject to 50% development charges on its student residence buildings and the full transit component of development changes for all projects. Crown agencies, such as Mohawk College, are exempt from municipal taxation.
McMaster University requested the City of Hamilton exempt their private-public partnerships from development charges. Council declined to do so during the 2019 comprehensive update of the Development Charges Bylaw.
Council voted against giving the exemption. Councillor Brad Clark stated, as a question, during the April 2019 meeting “If an individual developer comes in to build student residences then they pay development charges. But if McMaster does it, you are exempt from them, we’re trying to understand how an independent developer can get an exemption through McMaster University to build residences when they cannot do that on their own”.
Last week, the Ontario Land Tribunal (formerly known as the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal) approved the terms of settlement.
In it, the City of Hamilton agrees to add the following clause to Section 25 of the DC Bylaw to exempt post-secondary institutions receiving provincial funding from DCs.
(h) development on land vested in or leased to a university that receives regular and ongoing operating funds from the Government of Ontario for the purposes of post-secondary education, if the development in respect of which development charges would otherwise be payable is intended to be occupied and used by the university. The exemption in this subsection (h) shall only apply as long as sections 6.1 of the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.19, remains in force and effect.
(i) for greater certainty, the exemption from development charges referred to in subsection (h) applies with respect to land described in that subsection regardless of whether an application referred to in clause 26.2(1)(a) or (b) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, has been made with respect to that land on or before December 8, 2020.
In adding the clauses to the DC Bylaw, the City separately and specifically acknowledges it will appeal to McMaster’s current projects.

created: December 2, 2021


text:
Chedoke Avenue Residents Fight Park Pathway Lighting at OLT – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 20, 2021
A group of residents near the Chedoke Tot Lot say the City of Hamilton’s plan to install lighting along a park pathway will harm their quality of life, property values, increase crime, and as one writes, “exposes our neighbourhood to fringe members of society.”
The three residents, and a half-dozen supporters, are taking the Niagara Escarpment Commission to the Ontario Land Tribunal to overturn an NEC permit allowing the City to install the lights.
The Tot Lot is located within the development control area of the NEC. The NEC granted permits in July, finding the pathway lighting is in the public interest.
The pathway is a connector used by bicyclists and pedestrians travelling between the residential areas of Kirkendall and the Hamilton-Brantford rail trail bridge which goes over Highway 403 to the Ainslie Wood neighbourhood.
The City has installed similar LED lighting in public parks across Hamilton following crime prevention through environmental design principles.
“Lighting of the path exposes our neighbourhood to fringe members of society in an area with a ton of children. Lighting the path allows these folks to enter into neighbouring homes. Also ‘lights’ in an environmental area are a concern too,” writes appellant Aaron Scime in his statement of appeal to the OLT.
Scime resides on Chedoke Avenue.
Appellant Jacqueline Winters, who lives on Aberdeen Avenue, writes, “these lights will also invite people and activities that will add noise (sound carries from that area all the way to my back yard) and cause other issues (parties, drugs etc.) for the neighbors.”
Winters writes, “I believe these lights are not necessary and they will disrupt the area and pathways used many animals that cross between the golf course and the ravine (skunks, raccoons, wild turkeys, opossums, deer etc.) as they are generally out at night looking for food etc.”
The third appellant, Chedoke Avenue resident Gabe Crowder’s full statement is short and within the jurisdiction of the NEC, “the proposed use to light up the trail is not consistent with environmental policies.”
Ward 1 City Councillor Maureen Wilson, responding to questions from The Public Record, writes:
“I respect the right of residents to appeal and the process allows for this; however, I fundamentally disagree with the grounds of their appeal.  It is my responsibility to advance the broader public interest especially on matters of health and safety.  This active trail is on public property.  It is heavily used by Westdale Secondary students, essential workers, McMaster University students and staff and residents.  Conditions generated by COVID-19 have underscored the importance of safe outdoor transport routes, either by foot or cycle.  This is a matter of creating equity for users of a public space.”
Chedoke Avenue residents Michelle Torsey and Steve Barrett are seeking to be added as participants to the appeal. They jointly write, “the application for the addition of lighting to the trail is concerning as it goes against the agreement that was made with the city in 2010 following the outcome of the NEC hearing W/l/2009-2010/147.”
They state the lighting is unnecessary, “When asked, our current city councillor was not able to state whether anyone had requested lighting of this trail, rather her reason to request lighting was simply her own election commitment to add additional lighting, even, it appears, if it is deemed unnecessary.”
They close their letter, “we would like to deter teenagers and others from using this space for gatherings.”
The OLT appeal file includes correspondence between Councillor Wilson and area residents, the residents cc’d the NEC as part of their appeal filings.
In August 2021, Janis Blimkie, who lives on Chedoke Avenue, wrote on her own behalf and Cameron Blimkie, “we are surprised and dismayed that you would seek to spend taxpayer dollars adding light to a trail that was not welcome in 2010 and that we (all concerned residents who spent many hours in meetings with the city and NEC) were all assured at the time in 2010 when we tried to save the natural habitat from an asphalt trail that the trail would not have lights.”
“The objections to the development plan may seem minimal as it is only the tax paying residents backing onto the trail who will be impacted by this thoughtless decision. No one impacted uses this trail for other than leisure activity during daylight hours,” Blimkie wrote.
Wilson responded, “this trail has become a well-travelled commuter route for our city’s health care workers, students, university staff and essential workers along with many others during all four seasons … Aberdeen Avenue is a “minor arterial” road under the city’s classification system. There are no plans for bike lanes on this street for the foreseeable future and it is not felt to be a safe alternative for most who cycle.”
In response to Wilson’s email, Cameron Blimkie wrote, “I do not want my taxes on our beautiful property to subsidize occasional use by cyclists whose property values and living styles are NOT impacted by this lighting proposal. If it’s that critical a concern for the few that might use this trail in the evening then recoup the cost from them by licensing a night cycling permit or tariff of some sort to pay for it…I’d prefer along Aberdeen or some alternative route. My vote in the next municipal election will have a long memory.”
In today’s statement to The Public Record, Wilson states, “I initiated this proposal in response to concerns raised with me by many local residents. For example, a female resident described how she tripped and fell over a fallen branch on the pathway during an early morning walk.  Another resident reported feeling unsafe in the evening when using the pathway.  The lighting will provide enough illumination to allow pathway users to identify hazards and facial recognition.”
The OLT has not yet set the date for the appeal pre-hearing. The Public Record will report the date, and provide information on how to view the hearing, in our newsletter when the notice is issued.
Sign up for TPR’s newsletter here.

created: December 20, 2021


text:
City and Medallion Reach Deal to Allow New Nine-Storey Rental Building at 195 Wellington Street South – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 2, 2021
Hamilton City Council has approved a 9-storey residential rental building at 195 Wellington Street South.
The proposal by Medallion developments is subject to an Ontario Land Tribunal settlement hearing next week, following over four years of negotiation after Medallion appealed to the then-Ontario Municipal Board for non-decision on their original proposal for a 20-storey building at the site.
The development is within the control zone of the Niagara Escarpment Commission (NEC). The Commission required the lower height to respect the escarpment and lessen the impact upon the visual environment.
There is a tenant protection protocol in the settlement, the City will not issue building permits until Medallion submits a plan for “rehousing of tenants who are displaced due to the proposed demolition of the 35 rental units.”
Professional Planner Lindsay Dale-Harris of Bousfields Inc. represents Medallion and states in her affidavit to the Tribunal “Medallion has agreed to address any issues related to the rehousing of tenants.”
The Tenant Relocation Plan must be approved by Ward 2 Councillor Jason Farr and City of Hamilton staff.
Demoviction has been a major concern for tenants, three of whom registered as participants in 2018 at the first pre-hearing. Only the three parties (Medallion, the City of Hamilton, and NEC) were involved in settlement negotiations. During COVID, participants enter written statements to the Tribunal expressing their positions.
The new building will add 223 new residential units to the site including 10 studio units, 129 one-bedroom units and 84 two-bedroom units. 107 existing rental units on the site will be retained.
The proposed height for the 9-storey building is 32 metres including the mechanical penthouse. The original 20-storey proposal was 64 metres including the mechanical penthouse.
Due to the proximity of the building to the Niagara Escarpment, the NEC determined it was too tall and needed to be redesigned.
“The revised height, siting and design will result in very limited skylining of the Escarpment, which is achieved by a maximum building height of 126.7 [metres above mean sea level],” writes NEC Director Debbie Ramsay in support of the settlement. “Where skylining does occur, it is mitigated by design elements, including stepping back upper storeys and subdued exterior building colours, and associated landscaping techniques.”
187 parking spaces are provided as part of the Settlement Proposal, of which 12 are provided in a surface parking area and 175 are located in three levels of an underground parking garage. The resulting parking ratio is 0.56 parking spaces per unit.
Once approved at the Tribunal next week, Medallion will need to complete Site Plan approvals with the City’s planning department. There are no timelines in the settlement for demolition of portions of the existing residential building, nor timelines for construction.


text:
Clr Tom Jackson Says Trucks Downtown Are Not Safe nor Age Friendly for Seniors – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 3, 2021
East Hamilton Mountain Councillor Tom Jackson wants Hamilton’s Seniors’ Advisory Committee to take the truck route master plan.
During Friday’s SAC meeting, Jackson discussed Monday’s Council Truck Route Sub-Committee meeting and spoke of the need to prevent more trucks from driving through Hamilton’s downtown core.
The Truck Route Sub-Committee voted to have staff and consultants reconsider their proposals and return with changes to “ensure that [it is] Age-Friendly, to ensure safe streets, make safe communities – the premise of Vision Zero.”
“We heard from the business side of the trucking industry that time is money,” Jackson told SAC. “We’re trying to get those five axles, those big 18-wheelers primarily off of the nice main arteries of our downtown that lead into the neighbourhoods, and where families and, and kids and walkers and cyclists primarily are.”
He says Hamilton needs to “get them using more of the transportation corridor, what we’re now calling the ring roads around the city instead.”
Jackson is encouraging the Seniors’ Advisory Committee to discuss a position on the truck route master plan to submit to Council.
The issue will be on the committee’s agenda in January 2022.

created: December 3, 2021


text:
Council to Release Part of “Investigative Update” on Wednesday after Meeting – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 10, 2021
Hamilton City Council will release a public statement regarding an “investigative update” on Wednesday, December 15 following their ratification meeting.
They voted today to authorize the City’s internal auditor to release portion of the report.
The investigation was first presented to Council on December 8.

created: December 10, 2021


text:
Councillors Appoint New Board Member Despite Reservations – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 11, 2021
The City of Hamilton has a number of municipal corporations which conduct business on behalf of the City, one of them is the Hamilton Enterprises Holding Corporation which oversees the City’s internet service provider and energy corporations.
Council members appointed to the HEHco Board receive extra pay.
During a Council meeting Friday, HEHCo requested to expand its board to seven members from six.
Councillors Brad Clark and Maureen Wilson both asked the reason for the expansion, noting that the staff report to Council did not provide reasons.
Ward 5 Councillor Russ Powers stated “You know, I don’t understand the rationale while but certainly from a governance standpoint, it’s advantageous to have an odd number of directors so that you don’t end up with tie votes. So that may be the rationale.”
Clr Wilson quickly replied “16”, a reference to the number of members of City Council.
Other councillors were heard chuckling in the background.
Hamilton General Manager of Finance and Corporate Services Mike Zegarac clarified there were previously seven members, which was reduced to six after a resignation, and the request from staff was to return to seven.
Staff recommended appointing Elizabeth DiDonato to the HEHCo Board. Neither staff nor HEHCo provided any information about their recommended appointee.
“I’m sure the person is extremely qualified, but there’s no CV or any identification offered,” stated Clr Wilson. “I’m just trying to understand what is our statutory or legislated responsibility on this”
“It’s consistent with past practice,” said Mayor Fred Eisenberger. “We’ve always allowed the the boards to do the interview process and make the selection based on what they think their board requires and we’ve essentially for all intents and purposes have have approved without getting into the the application process”
GM Zegarac says it is the role of Council to confirm the appointees as the sole shareholder of HEHCo.
Council “must confirm the recommended board member and the role as shareholder is again to confirm the recommendation of the HEHCo board. And the HEHCo board has a responsibility of the recruitment and confirming the member and then they put forward a resolution to the shareholder for your consideration.”
Clr Clark questioned this approach. “In my mind, I say we trust but we verify. Right, and so I can’t verify here.”
HEHCo Chair Laurie Tugman responded, “It’s our responsibility as a Board to go through the selection process of finding directors but as shareholders from a good governance point of view, it’s the shareholders’ responsibility then to appoint those nominees that we put forward to the board.”
Clr Clark asked that in the future Council be provided some information about the nominated appointee.
Council unanimously approved Elizabeth DiDonato without any further information beyond her name and that she is a resident of Hamilton.
Clr Clark briefly raised the question of whether the Council is even allowed to appoint a person after the Office of the City Clerk declared on Thursday that the Municipal Act prohibits making appointments.
A City Clerk legislative staff member stated “is this is a board, not an advisory committee.”
The Office of City Clerk Andrea Holland has not provided any reference in the Municipal Act to support their declaration.

created: December 11, 2021


text:
Hamilton City Clerk Says Council Cannot Appoint Committee Members in Last Year of Term – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 9, 2021
The Office of Hamilton City Clerk Andrea Holland has ruled the Ontario Municipal Act prohibits municipalities from appointing anyone to any municipal committee during the 12 months which proceed a municipal election.
City Clerk’s Office Legislative Coordinator Tamara Bates delivered the interpretation at today’s Emergency and Community Services Committee, where councillors were being asked by the LGBTQ Advisory Committee to fill vacancies on the committee.
The City Clerk’s ruling means it will be at least a year and a half before the vacancies can be filled.
“The legislation is in the Municipal Act, but is it within 12 months, not at the end of council’s term, but within 12 months at a municipal election, that new members cannot be appointed to any committee of council,” Bates stated.
The Office of the City Clerk does not provide a citation of what Section of the Act states this.
The Act uses the term “election” and related words 162 times. None of these include any statement prohibiting appointments to bodies of Council.
Ward 5 City Councillor Russ Powers was appointed on November 12, which is less than a year prior to the October 24, 2022 regular election date.
City Clerk Andrea Holland prepared the bylaw appointing Powers to dozens of council bodies. The bylaw was passed on November 24, less than 11 months prior to the regular election.
Ward 6 Councillor Tom Jackson noted this, “Maybe it’s time to kind of relook that policy, so that we’re consistent … we just appointed a new member of Council who will have less than a year to serve on this term of Council.”
Council was told there is a separate City of Hamilton policy prohibiting any appointments in the year prior to an election.
Jackson asked if Council can amend its policies to allow appointments.
“If we were to change that, it would be in violation of the Municipal Act,” Bates stated.
Following pushback from members of the Council, the Clerk stated they would go back and “find some more clarity on that, that I can provide offline.”

created: December 9, 2021


text:
Hamilton Design Review Supportive of Six-Storey King East Proposal at Steven Street – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 13, 2021
Hamilton’s Design Review Panel is “generally supportive” of a planned six-storey 102 dwelling unit residential development at 537 to 563 King Street East along the B-Line LRT corridor. Members expressed some concern regarding the planned demolition of the heritage interest building at 537 King East, and suggested some design changes to the proposal.
DRP member comments related to the service and parking areas proposed at the rear, energy efficiency, rooftop uses, and a desire for future ground-level commercial along King Street.
“In general, I think the proposal is strong. The massing and the height are appropriate for the changes that are going to happen along that corridor,” stated DRP member Jennifer Mallard. Mallard is an architect and Principal at Diamond Schmitt. “I think the breakdown of the massing is successfully done. So I congratulate you on that.”
Mallard does not support demolishing the heritage building.
“The loss of our heritage buildings is a loss for all of us that building’s been there for a lot longer than we have been,” Mallard stated.
The applicant’s Planner Mile Weekes of A.J, Clarke and Associates, stated they are thinking about “maybe taking the brickwork and incorporating it into the new building … there’s a lot of options … we haven’t really gotten to that level of detail.”
Weekes stated retaining the existing westerly building will decrease new residential units. “It would be about 26 units lost right along the LRT corridor.”
DPR members asked the developer to consider making the roof an amenity space or installing a green roof.
They state the interface between the building access from Steven Street needs tweaking to be more pedestrian-friendly.
They support the landscaping strip with trees at the front of the building along King Street.
DPR member Jennifer Sisson, an architect and registered professional planner, suggested designing the ground-level units on King Street to allow conversion to commercial in the future.
“With the development of the LRT in the future, this area may be better served by more flexible units along King Street that could be converted to storefronts in the future,” Sisson stated.
The project meets zoning requirements and will need approval from City staff. A site plan application (file DA-21-159) has been filed with the City and is under review.
A-Game Investments is the owner of the properties. Benjamin [Ben] Julius discussed his company in a Facebook live event in May 2020, which can be viewed here.

created: December 13, 2021


text:
Hamilton Police Services Board Used Non-Official GMail Account for Public Business – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 19, 2021
The Hamilton Police Services Board was using a GMail account for public business.
The Public Record learned of the GMail account hpsbchair@gmail.com when the Police Board’s Administrator Kirsten Stevenson included in it an email exchange.
Stevenson states the “email address was temporary and only used on one occasion so I did not have to copy the Chair using her personal account. I managed this account and it is no longer being utilized.”
The new Police Board Chair is Pat Mandy, who took over on the Board after Mayor Fred Eisenberger resigned from the Board on November 16.
On Wednesday, December 15, Stevenson responded to a September 17 email requesting public documents, cc’ing the GMail account.
Mayor Fred Eisenberger and Stevenson ignored the September public information request until last week when TPR began the process of filing a formal complaint to Tribunals Ontario.
The Police Board held a secret emergency meeting on September 2nd to discuss making the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation a paid holiday for Hamilton Police Service Employees. The Board claims holding this discussion in public would reveal confidential legal information
TPR is asking the Tribunal to find this closed meeting was a violation of the open meeting requirement of the Public Services Act.
Upon learning of the use of Gmail accounts by the Police Board, TPR asked Stevenson “who is in control of this account, when was it created, and how are you as Administrator ensuring proper recording retention in compliance with Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act?”
Stevenson’s response, quoted verbatim above, is that the account was only used once and only to respond to TPR.
Stevenson did not explain why the Police Board members were not using their police board email accounts.
Shortly after learning that the Police Board uses Gmail for official business, TPR contacted Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commission for comment.
“Our office recommends that staff and leaders of public institutions strictly control the use of instant messaging and personal email accounts for conducting business (see our guidance on Instant Messaging and Personal Email Accounts). To the maximum extent possible, staff should only use work-issued email accounts. This is particularly the case since the onset of the pandemic when many public sector staff are working from home (see our July 2020 Privacy Fact Sheet on Working from Home During the COVID-19 Pandemic),” the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario wrote in response.
“Access to information is a core pillar of democracy. Ontarians expect transparency about government activities in order to hold their governments accountable. Requests for information cannot be evaded by using instant messaging or personal email accounts.”
TPR is filing freedom of information requests for all emails sent to this account, a listing of all non-public sector email and instant messaging services used by the Police Board, and all records contained within those services.

created: December 19, 2021


text:
Hamilton Public Library to Distribute Free HSR PRESTO Cards for Children – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 13, 2021
UPDATE:
HPL will begin the distribution of free children’s PRESTO cards on Friday, February 18.
Details will be posted to the HPL website at this address: https://hpl.ca/bus-card
Original December 2021 story:
The Hamilton Public Library will distribute free PRESTO cards for children ages 6 to 12, beginning after Family Day, February 21, 2022.
Hamilton City Council approved a free transit fare pilot for children between the ages of 6 to 12 until April 30, 2023 as part of the Hamilton Street Railway’s post-COVID efforts to encourage people to return to public transit.
Families must purchase a PRESTO card to be able to board buses without paying a fare. The usual charge for a PRESTO card is $6.00.
The Library is covering the card cost thanks to an anonymous $25,000 donation for youth initiatives. The Library says they have an additional donor pledge of $6,000 which will be added to the initiative.
HPL Director of Collection and Program Development Lisa Radha Weaver tells the Library Board they expect to purchase approximately 5,000 cards with the funds.
Children will require a library card to receive the PRESTO pass.
“We hope this program will both give children “Freedom to Discover” their City on the HSR and will also encourage children that are not yet members to join HPL,” Weaver states. “As we promote this service, we will also remind Hamiltonians that a Library Card gets you free access to Hamilton’s eight Civic Museums and borrow a pass to visit the Art Gallery of Hamilton.”
Families will have one month to activate the pass at City Hall, the HSR GO station office at 36 Hunter Street, or the Municipal Service Centres in Ancaster, Dundas, or Stoney Creek


text:
Hamilton’s Medical Officer of Health Considering Local COVID Restrictions as Omicron Variant Spreads – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 14, 2021
Hamilton’s average daily COVID case count continues to increase as people spend more time indoors and the more transmissible Omicron variant of the virus spreads.
In response, Hamilton’s Medical Officer of Health Dr. Elizabeth Richardson is asking people to decrease their contacts and make changes to protect healthcare capacity.
“We’re now hearing that the spread even amongst fully vaccinated individuals is infecting four to eight times more individuals than the Delta variant did,” Dr. Richardson said during a public briefing today. “And even if it is less severe, this could put significant strain on our healthcare system.”
Dr. Richardson says she is considering implementing local COVID restrictions and will be releasing guidance on Monday, December 20 during a planned afternoon press conference.
Dr. Richardson is recommending local schools cancel “in-person staff meetings, social gatherings, holiday events, and for all elementary-age students to stay in their respective cohorts at recess.”
It is important to reduce “the number of cases that have severe outcomes like hospitalization, ICUs use and death, particularly amongst those that are most vulnerable over the age of 50,” stated Dr. Richardson. “We want to save lives. And we want to protect our healthcare system so it could continue to serve us all.”
Asked by CBC if she is considering local restrictions, Dr. Richardson stated:
“That is something that we are all looking at, you’ve seen my colleagues across the province, a number of them put them in place, we are very much looking at putting those further in place here in Hamilton, we are consulting with the Office of the Chief MOH, about those issues, and what their plans are and when ours will come forward. So that’s absolutely top of mind for us. And it’s something we’re actively looking at.”
Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger echoed Dr. Richardson’s comment, calling on Hamiltonians to take precautions, get vaccinated if they are not already, and receive their booster shots as soon as they qualify.
“I think people need to be taking this one as seriously as all the other ones and this is not a cause for panic, but certainly a cause for action,” he stated.
“We’ve learned a lot. These past two years about how to keep ourselves and our loved ones safe. Everything we were doing is to protect the residents and beat this virus. And it’s vital that we all including those who have already received the vaccine continue to follow the public health guidelines to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and the variance in our community. And the best community service you can do for your family and friends and neighbours is to get vaccinated.”
Hamilton’s health care providers are working to increase their vaccination capacity to respond to the need for immediate booster doses, says Dr. Richardson.
“Healthcare system partners here in Hamilton, like across those across Ontario are ramping up to deliver more third doses over the coming weeks. You’ll hear more about those plans in the coming days.”
The City’s “gradual return to work process” is being reviewed says Acting General Manager of Emergency and Community Services Grace Mater. “In light of the changing public health trends. We will be looking at the impact on that timing as we look at returning them to the office. We will be reviewing our plans, and we’ll be making an announcement to all of our staff later this week.”
The next City of Hamilton public briefing is scheduled for Monday at 3:00 pm.

created: December 14, 2021


text:
HSR May Decrease Service as Driver Absences Increase: Memo – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 30, 2021
The City of Hamilton’s public transit agency, the Hamilton Street Railway, is preparing to decrease bus service to summer levels of service as the number of drivers needing to isolate at home due to COVID exposures increases.
“The HSR Planning Department is putting together a ‘Summer Weekday’ service level board, as a contingency in the event that absenteeism does, in fact, become an issue due to the newest Omicron variant spreading,” reads a union notice sent to the HSR’s bus operators by email earlier this evening.
“At present, while there has been a rise in uncontrolled absenteeism (62 per day) with COVID-related absences contributing, it has not gotten to the point of an emergency yet, but the [HSR] is trying to get ahead of that becoming a reality.”
The latest City of Hamilton staffing report lists 623 staff within the HSR’s operations section.
City Hall no longer provides routine updates regarding the number of HSR bus operators, the 623 staff includes some managerial, administrative, and supervisory staff.
The contract between the City of Hamilton and Amalgamated Transit Union requires work to be assigned to operators using a seniority system.
HSR operators will sign a special COVID board starting on Sunday, January 9, 2022.
Previous HSR COVID reduced schedules included “extra” buses providing service at school bell times and on busier routes.
The HSR is not the only transit agency facing staff shortages due to COVID isolation requirements.
GO Transit is presently struggling to meet its scheduled service due to staffing shortages. The first train out of Hamilton’s West Harbour GO station this morning was cancelled due to a staff shortage.
Last week, Mayor Fred Eisenberger stated the next Hamilton City Hall public press conference regarding the COVID situation will be on January 10, 2022.

created: December 30, 2021


text:
Indwell Bidding to Buy Delta Secondary School – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 11, 2021
Affordable and social housing charity Indwell is bidding against two private developers to purchase Delta Secondary School from the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board.
The school was closed in 2019 and is a heritage-designated East Hamilton landmark.
“We’re hoping that the School Board sees the value in our bid,” writes Indwell Director of Projects and Planning Graham Cubitt in response to a question from The Public Record.
“Our vision is to facilitate a community-informed project that prioritizes an affordable, mixed-income rental and home-ownership community for Hamilton households, while keeping the valued heritage of this site intact.”
The Indwell bid is financially supported by the Hamilton Community Foundation.
“HCF has provided the deposit for the bid & is committed to finance the purchase once we receive positive due diligence,” writes HCF CEO Terry Cooke. “We share Indwell’s vision for a mixed income community hub starting with a focus on affordable/supportive housing.”
Indwell is competing against major local developer New Horizon Development Group, and Toronto-based developer Windmill Developments.
Windmill specializes in converting heritage buildings into condos and has been seeking opportunities in Hamilton in recent years.
“We expect the private bidders may offer higher offers, but we’re confident they can’t outbid us on broad and transparent public benefits,” writes Cubitt. “We hope that the Board will look at the total public value of the offers, not just the top-line dollar value.”
Ontario Regulation 444/98 requires school boards to “dispose of a property at fair market value”.
Opened in 1924 and located at 1284 Main Street East, the building is heritage designated for its Modern Gothic style architecture which “still boasts handsome building elevations in Milton red rug brick and Tyndall limestone – the first such use of this stone building material in Hamilton and one of the first instances of its use in Ontario.”
Following the school board’s decision in 2012 that the school would close, Hamilton City Council began the process of placing a heritage designation on the building to protect it.
It was Hamilton’s oldest high school when it closed in 2019.
The heritage designation requires any residential conversion to protect the entire existing building and prohibits building on the front lawn.
The property is one of the largest in this area of East Hamilton, covering the entire block bound by Main Street East, Graham Avenue South, Maple Avenue, and Wexford Avenue South.
A six-story mid-rise building can be built on the rear asphalt area which served as a parking lot.
Cubitt writes Indwell wants “to be a catalyst for a full spectrum of public benefits through Delta’s redevelopment, including arts and sport/recreation organizations.”
“Schools are important public assets, and we believe these assets are more than just the financialized value of their land.”
The public school board will decide on bids early in 2022.


text:
Joey’s Note: Six-Unit Financing and CMHC – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 14, 2021
You learn something every day. I was discussing a seven-unit proposal with a friend who is a developer, I am trying to get a sense for what kind of development permissive zoning would allow individuals to develop.
My friend noted that seven-units is an unusual number as “if you have six or less, CMHC will give you the financing based on a simple appraisal rather than a full formal underwriting.”
For years, I have not questioned why so many developments have come in at six units. I kinda accepted that three-storey zoning results in six-unit walk-up apartments  – two units each floor with amenities and storage in the basement.
Long units with both front and rear windows feel more spacious, and new rentals seek to attract renters who are willing and able to pay above market rents.
You learn something new every day.


text:
Joey’s Notepad: The Risk of Classroom Outbreaks to HSR Staffing Levels – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 30, 2021
Every organization is planning what to do in the face of staff shortages caused by COVID self-isolation requirements.
Tonight, Hamilton’s hospital CEO issued an urgent “personal appeal to all healthcare workers who have availability tonight and in the coming days” to fill shifts to keep the hospitals operating.
Earlier this evening, I wrote on the HSR’s planning to deal with a potential shortage of bus operators.
This blog/notepad post adds to the HSR story.
A large number of the HSR’s bus operators live in Caledonia and surrounding communities in Haldimand County.
It is where they could purchase homes for the past decade, with an easy commute along Highway 6 to the HSR’s garage in Mount Hope.
Many of these operators have school-aged children.
We should expect the spread of COVID between children with the return to school next week.
Ontario’s COVID measures require entire families to self-isolate if any member of the household has COVID symptoms – there is no testing available, families are to presume they are dealing with COVID and isolate.
There are HSR operators who are married to each other, a child with COVID symptoms in these situations means two fewer operators able to report for work.
It is likely that some classrooms in Caledonia include multiple children whose parents are HSR operators.
You get the picture, with single degrees of separation and the likelihood that the COVID Omnicron variant is going to rapidly spread this January, the HSR’s planning for staffing shortages is prudent.


text:
Joey’s Notepad: Will 2030 Bring the Commonwealth ESport and Youth Games – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 30, 2021
The private bid team looking to bring the Commonwealth Games to Hamilton in 2030 have stated they are looking to reinvent the games for modern times 100 years after the founding of the British Empire Games here in Hamilton in 1930.
The first British Empire Games changed international sport competitions. The podium was introduced at the game, athletes’ housing was an integral part, and the games left a legacy of new facilities in the community.
In her year end message, the President of the Commonwealth Games Federation Dame Louise Martin hints at a major change the Hamilton 2030 Games may seek to implement: eSports.
Hamilton 2030 president P.J. Mercanti is also the leading partner of the Hamilton Urban Precinct Entertainment Group (HUPEG).
HUPEG won control of the City’s downtown entertainment properties, and HUPEG plans to build an esports zone – an arena for video gaming competition.
Dame Louise Martin’s year-end message reads:
“In May 2020, the CGF and Global Esports Federation (GEF) agreed a partnership to develop a Commonwealth Esports strategy. Following a close working relationship, the CGF and GEF will announce some exciting initiatives soon, to take place in 2022. Watch this space!”
It continues, “Esports will provide us with exciting new opportunities to engage with young people, which is so important.”
Hamilton 2030 bid team member Greg Maychak, now retired from the City of Hamilton, has been integral to the success of Hamilton’s annual participation in the International Children’s Games.
As a City of Hamilton Culture and Recreation Program Director, Maychak successfully hosted the ICG in both 1994 and 2000. He was also a lead member of the various City of Hamilton staff teams that bid on Commonwealth Games during the 1990s and 2000s.
Dame Martin’s message states:
“As we all know 60% of the people in the Commonwealth are under 30 years of age, which is why we are continuing to look at ways to empower young people to realise their potential. We are currently re-evaluating the concept of the Commonwealth Youth Games, to enable us to achieve our vision.”
The Commonwealth Games Federation ends this year much as the year began, trying to find a future for a sports enterprise which John Oliver asked in 2014, “How is This Still a Thing?”
The CGF is without a 2026 host, and is seeking any government willing to finance a 2026 Games.
In the hopes of finding a suitor, the Commonwealth Games have adopted an a la carte format, the 2026 host is only required to host track and field and swimming, with the host deciding which sports will make up the other thirteen required for the Games.
The CGF hopes to name a host for 2026 in March.
UPDATE CORRECTION: The Commonwealth Youth Games have existed since the 2000 Edinburgh Scotland games. I expect we can watch for them to take on greater importance in 2030.


text:
Mayor Eisenberger Says He Is “Definitely Up” For Seeking Reelection, Will Announce Decision early in 2022 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 26, 2021
Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger says he is “definitely up” for seeking re-election because he is “very, very optimistic for the future of our city,” conditioning his enthusiasm by saying, “am I going to run again? That is an open question.”
The Mayor’s remarks came during his end-of-year message, conducted in a fireside chat format, posted to the City of Hamilton YouTube channel this afternoon.
Mayor Eisenberger praised the work of City Council, City Manager Janette Smith, the City’s Senior Leadership Team, and City of Hamilton staff whom he credited for responding effectively to the pandemic and many social challenges in the community.
“It’s been particularly challenging through this pandemic; it really has accelerated some of our social challenges in all of our communities, whether it’s here or right across the country,” Eisenberger stated. “The housing issue, with house pricing going up thirty percent year-over-year, has been particularly challenging as well for those that are trying to get into the market or get, you know, affordable rents. And that’s not something that municipality can actively control.”
The Mayor says the City of Hamilton is increasing its spending on affordable housing and homelessness.
“The City of Hamilton has about seven-thousand social affordable housing units that we manage, and the private sector not-for-profit sector has about seven-thousand units as well. So it’s about 14,000 units that we manage, overall, to try and provide housing opportunities for folks in our community.”
He discussed his childhood experiences in geared to income housing.
“I grew up in gear to income housing, in the east end of the City of Hamilton, and it was the kind of hand up that that helped our family get to be in a better place for all the kids and children, which is the aspiration of every immigrant family that comes to our country or our town,” Eisenberger stated.
“I’m a huge believer in providing that kind of hand up and assistance and support for everyone in our community to the best degree possible.”
On homeless encampments, Eisenberger says, “unfortunately, tents are not safe and secure environments for people to be living in,” and that the City is “doing everything possible on a day to day basis working with those individuals, to try and get them into safe and secure locations or a roof over their head.”
“We have a significant amount of staff that are working on this every day. And that is work that is not going to stop.”
Eisenberger praised the City’s response to COVID and vaccination roll-out.
“The roll-out in terms of getting [vaccines] into the arms of individuals on a localized level, has been a massive, massive effort,” he stated. “There’s a book to be written about what cities had to do and what public health institutions had to do, what our hospitals needed to do to protect citizens in our community. They have done such an amazing job.”
Eisenberger spoke about his decision to step off the Police Services Board, stating he did so “purely and plainly” for “diversity.”
“I wanted to ensure that we were able to, at the very least get more women on to the Police Services Board. So I was pleased to see Judi Partridge being selected as the first woman in 25 plus years to be appointed by the City of Hamilton to the Police Services Board.”
The Mayor says he will decide on re-election in the coming months.
“‘m very focused on pandemic and booster shots and vaccinating our kids, getting all that work done to make sure it gets done effectively and helping to continue to promote our post-pandemic economic recovery.”
“That is going to occupy certainly my time in the next two or three months, but some time and then, you know, the early early next year. I’m going to have to make a decision, and I’ll let you know.”

created: December 26, 2021


text:
Mayor Fred Eisenberger and Hamilton Police Board Refuse to Release Secret Meeting Agenda – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 13, 2021
The Hamilton Police Services Board and Mayor Fred Eisenberger have steadfastly refused to release the agenda of a secret emergency meeting held by the Police Services Board on September 2nd.
The Public Record is the only media outlet in Hamilton to report upon the secret meeting, which we did on September 19.
Mayor Eisenberger declared an emergency related to “security or intimate personal matters” to discuss making the National Day for Truth and Reconcilation a holiday for Hamilton Police Service employees.
In September, Hamilton Police Board administrator Kirsten Stevenson issued the following statement on behalf of the Police Board:
“Emergency meetings may be called by the Chair of the Board, with the consent of the majority of the Members of the Board, to deal with emergency or extraordinary situations. As the Board did not have a regular meeting scheduled in August, the Board met to discuss an item that falls under the category of ‘extraordinary situations’ as the matter needed to be dealt with in a timely manner. The matter involved legal issues, and as such, was dealt with in-camera. The Board’s decision was reported back at its next public meeting, which was held on September 16, 2021. The Board’s September 2, 2021 meeting was held in compliance with the Police Services Act.”
Both Mayor Eisenberger and Stevenson refuse to provide the agenda, minutes, open session video, or why the meeting was conducted in secret.
They have refused to post the meeting agenda to the Board’s website.
Section 35 of the Police Services Act states all police board meetings must be open to the public and notice of meetings provided.
Attempts to receive these public records from the board have failed. Neither the Mayor nor Stevenson responded to requests for the documents.
The Public Record will be escalating our public records request with a complaint to Tribunals Ontario under the Police Services Act.


text:
Neighbours Opposed New Home on East 22nd Street, Now The OLT Will Decide – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 27, 2021
Should additional single-family detached homes be allowed in Hamilton’s mature neighbourhoods with double-size lots?
That is the question the Ontario Land Tribunal must decide in an appeal that will help determine how Hamilton intensifies following City Council’s decision to freeze the urban boundary.
A numbered company that owns 129 East 22nd Street is appealing the denial of their application to split the double lot property into two single lots, and build a new single-detached home that will be a duplex.
Hamilton’s Committee of Adjustment voted to deny the application, stating the proposal is “shoehorning a house” into a “stable neighbourhood.”
Committee members expressed concern about the shared driveway and parking in the rear. Members stated that it would de facto create a parking lot.
The video of the meeting is available online here.
Ward 7 City Councillor Esther Paul opposes the proposal.
The City’s professional planning staff wrote the proposal meets zoning requirements, represents good planning, and recommended approval.
Coun. Pauls stated residents were concerned about parking in the rear of the properties. “To me, it looks like a nightmare.”
“I was surprised how small the lot was,” Pauls stated of her impression upon visiting the property.
129 East 22nd is near the Concession Street Business Improvement
Area, and is considered well-service by transit.
Charlene Lord spoke against the application at the Committee of Adjustment hearing, stating, “I am not against duplexes in the area. I am not.”
“With all due respect to the developer, she did indicate there are these kinds of properties in other neighbourhoods around East 22nd from Queensdale and Crockett,” Lord stated. “But this will be the first property like that on the street. It would be quite unusual for this neighbourhood to have this kind of dwelling,” Lord continued.
“To indicate it is a separate lot, it never has been used as that. Until you get, again, no disrespect, a developer coming in who has no intention of living in this property, it will be a full rental.”
“Again, I am not against duplexes, my preference in a duplex area, it would be for a parent who I had to look after, I would still be living in my home, I would be maintaining my property,” Lord said.
Lord argued the development will cause car lights to shine on her property, cause noise disturbance from cars, and increase traffic on her street.
This development proposal encapsulates the challenges of freezing the urban boundary and intensification.
During the recent urban boundary debate, none of the homeowners on East 22nd Street displayed Stop Sprawl HamOnt lawn signs.
As planning staff noted in their reports, this proposal is a form of gentle intensification. Staff wrote the additional home will not change the single-family home character of the neighbourhood.
The numbered company that owns the property is registered with a Thornhill mailing address and offers rentals across the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area.
Many of the neighbours wrote in opposition to the housing being rental.
Housing tenure is not a zoning issue, and not before the Ontario Land Tribunal.
“I am against the building of a tri-plex,” wrote one nearby homeowner. “I worry about parking problems and devalued properties on our street. This is a family oriented area and I do not believe this building would fit into our neighbourhood or enhance it!”
“The neighbourhood was developed back in the ’40s with the intent of construction of single family dwellings, lots of green space with good sized yards to grow a family,” read another letter, with the neighbour writing that rentals and duplexes are not in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood.
Hamilton City Council will decide in closed session if the City will spend up to $50,000 to hire outside lawyers and planners to oppose the development at the OLT.
As the City’s internal planning professionals recommended approval, Council must hire an outside Registered Professional Planner to argue Coun. Pauls’ case.
One nearby homeowner wrote to City Hall stating, “to change this is a major variance and allowing for this acceptation sets a precedent that any neighbourhood in Hamilton can transition to a high density one,” reads another letter. “Others could decide to remove their garages and driveways so they can also fit a single dwelling, where would it stop?”
The OLT has not yet set the date for the appeal pre-hearing. The Public Record will report the date, and provide information on how to view the hearing, in our newsletter when the notice is issued.
Sign up for TPR’s newsletter here.

created: December 27, 2021


text:
Ontario Auditor General: Province Failing To Prevent and Respond to Homelessness – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 1, 2021
Ontario’s Auditor General is laying the responsibility for Ontario’s affordable housing and homelessness crisis squarely at the feet of the provincial government.
“Ontario does not have an overarching and co-ordinated provincial strategy to prevent and reduce homelessness,” reads Auditor General of Ontario Bonnie Lysyk’s report on homeless.
The Auditor General’s report finds a lack of tracking, data collection, spending oversight, and strategies as serious problems and calls on the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and House to act immediately to standardize municipal approaches to homelessness, ensure reliable data collection, implement spending oversight, and to set standards for everything from affordable housing waitlist prioritization to emergency shelter operations.
“The Ministry does not evaluate the effectiveness of programs and services provided with provincial funding to people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.”
Ontario’s affordable housing crisis has worsened significantly in recent years with the provincial average rental cost of a one-bedroom apartment reaching $1,241 per month in October 2020.
Over 211,000 households are waiting for social housing in Ontario.
“Lack of housing affordability is a roadblock to reducing homelessness.”
The report states “social assistance is the primary source of income for people who are homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness” but assistance does not provide enough for housing. Ontario Works provides $508 per month in income support, the Ontario Disability Support Program provides $1,169 per month.
The report states municipalities have increased their homeless response budgets by 59% during the past four fiscal years, significantly more than the 32% increase in provincial spending, and 29% increase in federal spending.
Most of this increase is in emergency supports, not long-term solutions.
“The cost of homelessness was examined in a 2014 national study conducted by the Mental Health Commission of Canada across five Canadian cities (Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal and Moncton). The study found, for the highest needs people, providing housing and required support services to people who are homeless cost on average $19,600 per person, per year. However, this cost was offset by an average reduction of $42,500 in other services not utilized,” reads the report.
Ontario’s municipalities are failing to ensure social housing is provided to those with the greatest need, the report finds. The Province implemented a new “By-Name List” system for waiting lists, “but this new list does not guarantee that the people most in need will receive housing first.”
The report calls on municipalities to collect consolidated information confirming whether people who are homeless are provided needed supports and services.
Auditor General Lysyk states the provincial government needs to set standards and municipalities must inspect homeless shelters. “Some municipalities have not established standards for shelter operations and none are sufficiently performing inspections of shelters to ensure that where standards have been set, they are being met for the health and safety of residents.”
Homelessness increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, with encampments appearing in cities across Ontario. Among the contributing factors, the Auditor General finds that many people who were precariously housed (“couch surfing”) were no longer able to find temporary arrangements, and people being released from correctional facilities were provided with housing options.
“As of June 2021, Toronto reported that 40% of individuals referred to shelters from an encampment had no previous shelter use in the city prior to the start of the pandemic, indicating they may be new to homelessness, or to the city,” the report reads.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing states it accepts the finding of the report and will work to implement recommendations.

created: December 1, 2021


text:
PHOTO: Council First In-Person Committee Meeting Since COVID – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 3, 2021
Hamilton City Council’s licensing committee, the Licensing Tribunal, held its first meeting since February 2020 this morning.
This is the first in-person City of Hamilton public meeting since the beginning of the COVID pandemic in March 2020.
There were two taxi license appeals this morning, both of which were resolved on consent of both parties.
Hamilton City Council presently have no stated plans to resume other meetings using an in-person meeting format.


text:
Red Hill Inquiry Hearings “Anticipated” to Start in mid-2022 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 7, 2021
The Judicial Inquiry into the cover-up of safety reports regarding the Red Hill Valley Parkway is “anticipated” to begin public hearings in mid-2022, says a report from City of Hamilton City Solicitor Stephen Spracklin and Director of Communications & Strategic Initiatives Matthew Grant.
The report was released last Tuesday afternoon and will be considered by Council on Wednesday.
Council called the Inquiry in early 2019 after the public learned of the cover-up of the report, which was kept secret by City Hall during the 2018 municipal election.
City Hall was engaged in the coverup of the 24-billion litre combined sewage and stormwater leak into Cootes Paradise at the same time.
It is now expected the Inquiry will cost between $18 to $20 million dollars to complete.
Thus far, the Inquiry has cost $11.1 million, with $6.5 million being spent by the Inquiry Commission, the other $4.6 million are City Hall’s costs for external legal counsel, consultants, and data collection.
The initial cost estimate for the Inquiry was between $5 to $7 million dollars when it was called in early 2019.
Included in the final cost estimate is $432,400 to livestream the public hearings ($5,405 per day for 80 days), $5.5-million for Commission and City legal fees, and $180,900 for court reporter costs to transcribe the hearings.
The Inquiry has been researching and finding documents for the past two years. During these searches, additional information was uncovered and the Inquiry Counsel expanded their list of witnesses. The initial list of 36 witnesses expanded to 64 in January 2021, with over 115,000 documents being reviewed by the Inquiry.
Grant is asking Council to approve the hiring of an additional communications officer at an annual salary of $115,000 to communicate public updates on behalf of the City Manager’s Office during the Inquiry’s public hearing.
The report requests Council to allow City Manager Janette Smith to approve external legal counsel invoices of up to $1 million dollars each.
“It is anticipated that the hearing stage of the judicial inquiry should be able to commence during the second quarter of 2022, with the report stage potentially concluding prior to the end of the calendar year 2022,” the City staff report states.
The City staff report says there is a “Privilege dispute” regarding the “Boghosian memos”, and a “virtual privilege dispute” which is may or may not be the same, the report does not specify.
David G. Boghosian is a well-regarded municipal lawyer who has been hired by the City of Hamilton and Hamilton Police Services Board on a regular basis in the past. He was counsel for the Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board in Hill v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board.
Council will discuss the “Boghosian memos” in closed session.
The Red Hill Inquiry Commission last updated the public on July 27, 2020. The City report states “We understand that Commission Counsel will be announcing the start date of the Public Hearing once the witness interviews and document disclosure phases of the Inquiry conclude.”

created: December 7, 2021


text:
Three Councillors Vote Against Further City Hall Secrecy on Red Hill – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

December 10, 2021
Three Hamilton City Councillors voted against the confidential direction given to the City’s lawyers during Friday’s closed session.
Councillors Maureen Wilson, John-Paul Danko, and Brad Clark voted against the direction.
Councillors Jason Farr, Russ Powers (Ward 5), Tom Jackson, Esther Pauls, Maria Pearson, Brenda Johnson, Arlene Vanderbeek, and Mayor Fred Eisenberger all voted in favour.
In past City Hall coverups and scandals, Wilson, Danko, and Clark have voted differently than the Old Guard political faction.
The Municipal Act forbids Wilson, Danko, and Clark from explaining why they voted differently than the rest of Council.


text:
Another Citizen Member Resigns From Hamilton Market Board – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

January 14, 2022
Joshua Czerniga resigned from the Hamilton Farmers’ Market Board in December, citing an ongoing dispute with other citizen members of the Market Board.
Czerniga declined to comment when contacted by The Public Record.
Czerniga was a citizen appointee.
The letter was cc’d to the Director of Talent and Diversity and the Supervisor of Talent Services in the Human Resources division of the City Manager’s Office.  Additionally, City of Hamilton lawyer Susan Nicholson was cc’d on the resignation letter.
This is only the latest resignation for the Board which two consultant reports have described as ineffective. A third consultant’s report is ongoing, no date has been announced for its completion.
The Market’s reporting structure at the City of Hamilton recently changed. The City’s Director of Innovation Cyrus Tehrani is no longer the managing director, with responsibility for the Market moving from the City Manager’s Office to Planning and Economic Development.
The City’s Manager of Real Estate Ray Kessler is presently managing director pending the consultant’s report and a review of the Market’s structure.

created: January 14, 2022


text:
BRIEF: CUPE 5167 Loses Grievance Seeking to Allow FT Union Exec to Work Overtime at City – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

January 13, 2022
CUPE 5167 Vice-President Jay Berberick has been on leave from his job as a City bylaw enforcement officer since becoming his union’s full-time vice president and chief steward on June 24, 2019.
The union, on Berberick’s behalf, grieved after Berberick sought to work overtime shifts as a bylaw officer while on leave at the union.
Arbitrator Brian Sheehan ruled to dismiss the grievance, finding that the union’s contract with the City does not force the municipality to give Berberick overtime shifts while he is on a leave of absence.
The ruling is on CanLII.

created: January 13, 2022


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton Bylaw Issued 5638 Charges in 2021, an increase of 52% – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

January 27, 2022
The City of Hamilton’s bylaw services issued 5638 charges in 2021, an increase of 52% from 2020. 3703 charges were laid in 2020, and 3414 in 2019.
Additionally, the City By-law officers issued 864 provincial act COVID charges.
Charges issued under the Parks By-law increased 184% in 2021 compared to 2019. There were 2437 Parks By-law charges in 2021, compared to 525 in 2020, and 868 in 2019.
Yard Maintenance By-law charges increased by 35% with 1568 charges in 2021, compared to 1158 in 2020, there were 197 charges in 2019.
Charges under the Animal Ownership, Property Standards, and Vacant Building By-laws have decreased during the pandemic.
The statistics are included in an annual information update sent to Council this week. The update includes a breakdown of charges by ward.

created: January 27, 2022


text:
BRIEF: Ontario Land Tribunal Issues Rare Cost Order Against Municipality – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

January 6, 2022
The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an extremely rare cost order against a municipality.
OLT Member Blair Taylor ruled that the Township of Norwich’s conduct was “unreasonable” in opposing a zoning application for a barn.
The case involved ‘a young farmer, who was forced to bring the appeal in order to build a barn for the financial stability and prosperity of his modest farming operation.’
Counsel for the farmer sought a costs order writing, the County’s planning staff “recommended the application” that “there was no genuine issue in dispute” and “notwithstanding this the Township retained an outside expert and external counsel to resist the application.”
The Township’s politicians opposed the application claiming that “the Applicant had promised no further buildings would be constructed.”
The Township failed to provide any evidence of this to the Tribunal and instead “totally abandon[ed] its rationale for the refusal” during the OLT hearing.”
Mbr Taylor noted some of the concerns advanced by the Township “could likely have been resolved through pre-hearing communication and a thorough reading of the Nutrient Management Plan.”
The Tribunal ordered the Township to pay $6,000 in costs, approximately half of the farmer’s legal bills.
The City of Hamilton should take note.
Mbr Taylor took note of inconsistent decision-making by certain members of Hamilton City Council in the decision he wrote approving a mid-rise building at 600 James Street North.

created: January 6, 2022


text:
City of Hamilton Looking to Purchase 10 Natural Gas Fuelled Waste Collection Trucks – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

January 8, 2022
The City of Hamilton’s fleet division is asking Council to approve purchasing ten natural gas-fueled waste collection vehicles beginning in 2023 to replace diesel-fueled trucks as they reach their end of service.
Natural gas vehicles cost approximately 20 to 25 percent more than comparable diesel vehicles, adding approximately $60,000 to the purchase price.
The City operates 37 waste collection trucks, which have an average service life of seven years.
Staff are asking Council to approve using $700,000 in funding from various non-operating budget sources – including reserves – to cover the additional cost.
The conversion to natural gas is tied to the City’s climate action strategies to decrease the municipality’s carbon footprint.
Natural gas trucks are expected to decrease carbon emissions by 17.3 percent compared to diesel.
The plan requires the City to add a compressed natural gas fueling station at the waste collection vehicle yard on Burlington Street.
Council’s Public Works Committee will vote on the request during their January 10 meeting.

created: January 8, 2022


text:
City of Hamilton to Spend $2-Mil in 2022 for LDD Moth Aerial Spraying – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

January 8, 2022
Hamilton City Council is expected to approve $3-million to hire Zimmer Air Services Inc. To provide aerial spraying to control LDD moth outbreaks in 2022 and 2023.
The City hopes to prevent damage to the City’s tree canopy similar to last year’s significant outbreak caused by the nuisance moths previously referred to as gypsy moths.
City forestry staff write airborne treatments are needed to prevent the “significant and repeated defoliation of the many tree species [that] will likely result in mortality.”
City forestry staff state egg mass surveys conducted in the fall of 2021 found nearly 50% of the tree plots surveyed contained a concentration of LLD moth eggs exceeding 2500 per hectare.
The $3-million will be funded from reserve funds instead of being added to the 2022 and 2023 operating budgets.
Aerial spraying will be conducted in six plots across the City using a helicopter. The map is below:
Spraying is expected to occur between May 15 and June 15, prior to 7:30 am on any given day, dependent upon weather conditions.
The City of Hamilton says it will provide public notifications prior to spraying.
The staff report can be read here.