text:
Coleman: We Must Peacefully Confront Extremism: I'll Be Standing Peacefully Tomorrow, You Must Too – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 24, 2018
White supremacy must be opposed. It has no place in our society and I fully support the plans of the Hamilton District Labour Council to peacefully stand on Locke Street on Sunday in response to a expected march by extremist white nationalists.
Journalist Evan Balgord tracks anti-Muslim and white nationalist movements in Canada, and he retweeted a link to a post by The ARC Collective of what the collective states is a series of private messages planning Sunday’s “Patriot” march.
I served three years in the Canadian Forces, I served with actual patriots of all races and creeds. These white supremacists are not patriots, they are the furthest thing from patriots.
Since the violence of March 3rd , by a group I’ll refer to as a the “Ungovernables”* after their sign, there’s been a great deal of tension and unease in the community. There have been attempts to make it seem that we have to choose one of the extremes. It’s a false dichotomy.
We can (and must) choose to stand for peace, and that’s what I’m going to do.
Violence is not the answer; violence is what both sides wish because without violence they are not relevant. Without violence, they cannot gain the attention they seek.
I’m opposed to both the white nationalists and the Ungovernables. I continue to support the Charter Right to Free Expression; which includes the ability of people to use expression for purposes that I strongly dislike. It is our duty as residents in a free and democratic society to peacefully oppose hatred and violence; to opposed vile speech.
The more of us who stand peacefully on Sunday, the stronger the message will be that our Hamilton is a welcoming city that aspires to be the best place to live in Canada.
I considered not standing on Sunday, fearful for my safety knowing that my stance against extremism in all forms will make me a target. I understand that many of you reading share similar concerns for your own safety. The best way to ensure our safety, and the safety of our neighbours, is for us to stand peacefully in large numbers.
I’ll be joining the Labour Council’s peaceful stand against white supremacy on Sunday. I’ll continue to make sure white supremacists are not welcome in our community; and will continue to stand with my neighbours.
See you at 11am on Locke Street tomorrow.
* I use the term ungovernables instead of the more common anarchists to be more precise in my condemnation of the violence of March 1st. Peaceful political speech must be protected, and lumping peaceful proponents of anarchist political philosophy with the violent suspected anarchists of the ungovernables is harmful to our civil society.


text:
Coleman's Notes on Stand Against Hate Solidarity March – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 25, 2018
Today, I joined the Hamilton and District Labour Council’s Stand Against Hate, I wrote yesterday about why I believed doing so was the right thing to do as a community leader.
The following are my observations.
I arrived at Locke and King shortly after 11 a.m. On the south side of the street stood around 50 people with the Hamilton and District Labour Council’s Stand Against Hate, on the north side – mostly covering their faces with red balaclavas – stood about 30 anarchists/antifa and another 30 or so people around them.
Around 20 Hamilton Police officers formed a double depth line to block any movement south on Locke Street, with Hamilton’s four horse mounted unit forming the third column of the line. In the commercial plaza on the southwest corner; two vans of Waterloo Regional Police were unloading to join the Hamilton Police Crowd Control Unit
Police Officers all worn ‘soft cover’, meaning bicycle helmets if on bicycle, toques and baseball caps. The carried side pouches with their gas masks and other crowd control gear. None of the officers had their zip tie handcuffs visible, and all the officers I saw maintained firm passive body language.
Officers engaged in conversation with people on the Labour Council side of the road; across the road, the anarchists/antifa and communists were determining their next move.
Moving onto Locke Street North, they stared down the police on the south side and chanted police were racists oppressors who were there to protect white supremacists. The anarchist leader with the megaphone then signaled for them to turn west, marching to outflank the police line.
As this group moved, Hamilton and District Labour Council leadership huddled to determine their response. “Let’s follow, keep our group separate” was the consensus. Labour took up the rear.
A Hamilton Police Staff Sergeant at the rear radioed movements to the command center; and HPS vehicles moved to block traffic on Main at Margaret, as Hamilton Police formed new lines along the south side of Main blocking access to Locke Street from all approaches the march may take.
The march turned east on Main and moved towards Locke Street. Individuals broke off into the back ways, looking for a means of bypassing police lines. There were none.
Unaware bystanders found themselves unable to get to Locke Street, caught by surprise as police ensured no possible confrontation between the marchers and a small group of white nationalists who arrived earlier in the morning to walk up and down Locke. Police blocked access to everyone. (Media were allowed to move in and out of police lines)
The march arrived at Locke, but what was an expected stare down didn’t occur as the anarchists leading the march quickly turned back to the east and continued to Pearl Street. If they were seeking to outflank police, they didn’t succeed. Hidden from view on Pearl was a line of officers are Waterloo Regional Police who blocked this means of getting to Locke Street.
The quick decision of march leaders to move east appears to have surprised police command, as a group of seven officers were dispatched running to catch up to the march and reinforce police lines.
Onwards east the march continued to the next street.
At Ray Street, they were met with another line of police officers, and – once again – the Hamilton Police Mounted Unit. The anarchists at the front stopped the march, and tried to intimate the police line. Failing to draw a response from police, they paused and changed tactics. Chants began, the crowd became excited, and tensions began to rise.
Some shoving broke out on the front line, clearly visible from the rear of the march, tensions at the police line were mounting. A tense moment, captured by Rogers Media’s Brandon Rowe, as CUPE 5167 Outside Vice-President Barry Conway pulled an individual away from the police, while angrily yelling at the police line.
Conway describes himself as a radical unionist, and is widely know at City Hall for being among the most radical of CUPEs leadership at grievances and arbitration. He is well regarded for being level-headed and personable when expressing his principles, and known for his strategic ability to make gains over the long term.
In the middle of the crowd, two loud mouths were attempting to provoke the masked anarchists and communists by taunting them. Labour leaders and graduate students maintained the peace.
The march was stalled, the leadership elements huddled, and those who came looking for a viral conflict clip had pushed into the crowd. Police gave a crowd estimate of 150, which I believe includes the 50 or so journalists and onlookers recording every move.
The overwhelming number of officers meant police could maintain the peace. We didn’t even see the Toronto Police Service officers; indicating to me that Hamilton Police had a strong reserve of TPS officers in hard equipment to deal with any outbreak of violence.
Two people who I trust, and who were separately located close to both the anarchist leadership and labour leadership tell me that the anarchist leadership at the front was proposing marching on City Hall – having found no opening to Locke Street – and there was debate among labour leadership of where to take their part of the group next.
Labour leadership declared they were marching back to Victoria Park, and began to walk in that direction.
One of the anarchist leaders quickly took to the megaphone declaring that the “facists” had “run away” ‘having heard of our overwhelming counter-march’, declaring this was now a “Victory March” and called on people to march back to Victoria Park to celebrate.
The anarchist and communists banners quickly moved to reestablish themselves as the front of the march, police moved their vehicles on Main Street to force the march onto Ray Street northbound towards King Street.
The Mounted Unit took up the rear of the march, and the Sergeant commanding the column order the horses trot to generate the maximum noise effect to discourage the rear of the march from slowing down and creating a longer column for police to monitor.
Unsuspecting motorists found their vehicles surrounded by a sea of peaceful marchers. On Ray Street, a Hamilton Police Staff Sergeant ordered police units to force the marchers to Victoria Park. The Mounted Unit was directed to block the march from turning east at King Street.
Along King Street, a few of the masked marchers stepped out of the march to hug and chat with unmasked friends along the sidewalk. Hamilton Police forensic and intelligence branch officers were taking thousands of pictures of the various masked individuals, and who they were associating with.
At Locke Street, the two groups split and returned to their original sides of the street. The anarchist/antifa and communist group moved further into the park; labour slowly dispersed, and police reopened Locke Street to both individual pedestrians and traffic.
Police maintained a highly visible presence on Locke Street South as local residents resumed their Sunday activities, and various people spent about an hour yelling non-violently at each other in the park. (Here’s a good flavouring of the back-and-forth in Victoria Park)
In the park, police kept close to the crowd monitoring the situation. Forensic officers continued taking thousands of photos in close to the crowd. Hamilton Police Board Chair Lloyd Ferguson walked among the crowd in the park, observing things up close.
Eventually, people began to disperse.
Later in the day, a bunch of the “Patriot March” Sons of Odin group posed for a photograph out front of a house with a swastika in front of them, before even later in the night going to local anarchist meeting place The Tower to cause a disturbance. (UPDATE: these links are now broken, captures of Facebook posts are on the ARC Collective Blog.)

source: news-thepublicrecord

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


text:
Council Borrows from Reserve Funds for $19.4-Million Election Year One-Time Road Repairs – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 2, 2018
Hamilton City Councillors, in this election year, have dipped into the City’s reserve funds for $19.4-million dollars to give each Councillor $900,000 in one-time additional money to spend filling potholes in their wards, and $5.9-million in one-time funding for city-wide roads.
The reserve fund being used for this one-time spending presently has only $55-million remaining.
In order to maintain the City’s credit rating, the $19.4-million will be administered as a loan from the reserves and repaid over 15 years at a 3.1% increase rate for a total cost of $24.3-million.
The “loan” repayments will be funded by a 0.2% tax levy increase that will continue in perpetuity, City Council seeking to maintain a low tax increase in this election year.
Each Councillor will individually decide how to spend their ward’s $900,000 allocation.
Hamilton’s General Manager of Public Works Dan McKinnon states this year’s pothole problem is the result of a series of extreme temperature variation during recent winters and more “freeze-thaw cycles” that are causing roads to break up.
McKinnon told Council that staff may not be able to spend all the money this year as many road repairs require longer planning for utilities and traffic management.
Asked by Ward 10 Councillor Maria Pearson if “shave and paves” are available as a short-term solution for roads that have deteriorated, McKinnon says staff will be creating a list of roads to be done this year.
McKinnon says staff will be returning to Council to get a procurement exception to do work this year, he says staff feel they are getting a competitive price for the emergency Main West repairs and that he expects to get competitive pricing for further “shave and paves”.
Only one direct mention was made today of the City’s estimated $200-million per year infrastructure deficit. Pearson said Council may need to consider a permanent tax increase during the 2019 budget crisis to increase funding for infrastructure repairs.
Ward 8 Councillor Terry Whitehead expressed concern that the division of the money by ward does not reflect that wards have different amounts of roads, that Ward 8 has 250 kilometres of roads whereas some other wards only have 80 kilometres.
“We have some wards that are being left behind”, said Whitehead. “I’d prefer equity”.
The one-time loan plan was unanimously approved by Council sitting in committee today, and will ratified by Council on Thursday March 8 when the 2018 budget is finalized.


text:
Councillors Listen Silently as Citizens Say Fund The HSR [Video: 2018 City of Hamilton Public Budget Delegations] – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 5, 2018
“The Hamilton Street Railway is broken”, Karl Andrus opened public delegations Tuesday evening by stating. “In fact, it’s more broken than its been in my lifetime”
Andrus’ delegation was the first of many to bring facts to Council. He presented statistics on past HSR funding, past HSR service levels, and inflation adjusted figures. In 1986, the HSR moved over 31 million passengers, in 2016, the HSR moved only 21 million. Inflation adjusted, the 1986 HSR budget amounted to $112,105,600 in 2018 dollars. The HSR’s budget in 2017 was $63,455,410.
Andrus criticized Council for making cuts to the HSR in 2017 which caused the present transit crisis.
“Riders are organized, we’re angry. Your platitudes, half-truths, and public investment records in this vital service will be judged come election time”, Andrus told eleven Councillors present. Absent Councillors were Farr, Whitehead, Ferguson, Vanderbeek, and Pasuta.
Craig Burley, a lawyer who rides the HSR, reinforced similar points. He opened by explaining to Council the cost to the local economy of delays to the LRT project, especially delays to economic development that will result from the project.
“I’m a regular rider, I use it most days to get to work”, Burley told Council of the HSR. Burley reminded Council that many people delegated during last year’s budget asking Council to fund the HSR.
“The planned HSR service standard improvement in 2017, that you decided to cut, were the addition of new buses, 29 drivers, and 34 000 hours of extra service”, Burley reminded Council.
“And what did we see happen in the second half of 2017?” Burley said referring to the Transit Crisis. “I’m not merely imploring you not to make the same mistake again, I honest don’t think you will, I know you’ll be deeply tempted”.
“I think the City took a tremendous black eye in the second half of last year related to HSR funding”.
Three young women from Hamilton Mountain spoke to Council about the challenge of attending McMaster relying upon the HSR.
Stephanie Bertolo, a Ward 6 resident, spoke on behalf of the McMaster Students Union as their Associate Vice-President Municipal Affairs. She told Council that cancelled HSR service is impacting undergraduates, and if not fixed, could result in McMaster students not seeing value in their HSR UPass.
Christine Yachouh, a recent McMaster graduate and Ward 6 resident, shared her experience as a “young professional living in Hamilton”.”As a commuter student using the HSR to get to McMaster was definitely a struggle. It took anywhere from 60 to 90 minutes … versus the 25 minutes it would take if I were driving by car”.
Deanna Allain, a Ward 7 resident who will be attending McMaster starting in September, told Council of the bypass problems on the 41-Mohawk bus, and the problem of missing buses.
“In September, I will need to take two buses from my home on the Mountain to reach McMaster. A trip that takes me about 45 minutes and I have very real concerns about buses being full or cancelled”, Allain told Council.
“I’m concerned that I will have to double my expenses by either moving into residence or the Westdale area,” Allain said of the service issues with the HSR. “It is very important that you vote to resume the 10-year local transit strategy and increase funding for HSR services so that Hamiltonians do not have to consider doubling post-secondary expenses to attend Hamilton’s own McMaster University”
During the 90 minutes of public delegations, Councillors had no questions for delegates, sitting silently and listening.
Council voted three days later, on Friday, to tentatively approve the 2018 budget with a 1.9% average tax increase. The HSR budget increase was included in the approved Public Works budget; confirmation of Council’s budget decisions will be done Thursday March 8 at a 9:30am Special Council session.
(Full Video of this meeting on The Public Record’s YouTube page)


text:
Council, What You Say in Public is Public Record and It Matters – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 5, 2018
A couple of years ago, I was subpoenaed to the Conservation Review Board in a dispute between the lawyer for City Council and an appellant.
The appellant sought to enter the statements of Councillors into the record at the CRB, and the lawyer for Council objected on the grounds the The Public Record’s recordings were a violation of Council’s privacy. By the time I sat on the stand, the City’s lawyer focused their questions on ensuring that the Board would receive an unedited copy of the recording of a May 2014 meeting.
The underlying issue for the City lawyer was that Councillors had made statements prejudicial to the appellant, and this would undermine the City’s case.
The OMB and CRB have both ruled The Public Record’s recordings of public meetings are legal, and may be entered into evidence at hearings. It is now common for appellants to enter statements by Councillors with my video as the proof.
During the Ward Boundary Review OMB hearing, counsel for the City argued extensively for the exclusion of Councillors statements, tell the Board they should only consider the outcome of the Council vote, not the individual motives of Councillors in voting. The Board rejected this.
During public participant statement phase of the hearing, numerous speakers from Ward 8 referred to any change to ward boundaries as “reckless and dangerous”.  The next day, Ward 8 Councillor Terry Whitehead’s use of this phrase during Council debates was entered into the record by another participant citing written reports of meetings. Appellant Rob Dobrucki successfully entered my video of debates during which Councillors referred repeatedly to the “balance of power” as a primary motivation for their support of gerrymandered wards which effectively maintained the status quo.
In the end, the OMB ruled against Council’s wards, citing ‘balance of power’ as a key factor in the ruling.
Last week, I attended the Ontario Municipal Board prehearing for the appeal against the City’s Pier 8 redevelopment plan. The short summary of the prehearing is City Council suffered a significant setback when the Board ruled it will review Council’s potential conflict of interest in being both the planning approval body and seeking to maximize the value of the land for sale. (Read the full story here)
Once again, the Board made its decision based upon statements made by Councillors while deliberating.
As the planning authority, Council’s responsibility is to plan communities for the maximum benefit of community as a whole, while meeting the requirements of provincial planning policies. In the case of Pier 8, numerous Councillors cited a desire to maximize the City’s revenues in selling the land; and repeatedly pressed for changes to the plan to maximize those revenues.
It is for this reason that the lawyer for Council fought to have the OMB exclude statements by Councillors. Having lost that battle, Council’s lawyer now faces the uphill battle of convincing the OMB that statements of Councillors shouldn’t be taken at face value.
It remains to be seen how this effects the City’s planned sale of the Pier 8 lands this spring; it is possible the sale will be delayed as the OMB case progresses, or possible the industrial appellants – who have the strongest case against the Pier 8 development – will reached an agreement with the consortium the City decides to sell to.
One thing is certain, what Councillors say matters. In the age of growing transparency and video recording of every meeting, Councillors need to remember this more than ever.


text:
Developer Pitches New Public Library Branch as Part of Hamilton West Harbour Pier 8 Bid – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 16, 2018
Hamilton’s Chief Librarian says the Urban Capital / Core Urban Inc bidding group for Hamilton’s Pier 8 development is seeking to enter a public-private partnership to build a new library branch on Hamilton’s waterfront.
Urban Capital/Core Urban is one of five developer groups shortlisted to bid on purchasing the Pier 8 lands from the City. Urban Capital/Core Urban Inc is seeking to include a library branch as part of their bid for the project. Final bid proposals are due to the City of Hamilton this month.
Paul Takala writes, in a letter dated March 2nd released this afternoon, the Library administration is interested in discussing the idea of a Pier 8 branch.
“We appreciate Urban Core Inc. [sic] & Urban Capital’s vision and commitment to creating such public spaces” Takala writes. “I am therefore pleased to extend a non-exclusive Expression of Interest in locating a public library as part of the Pier 8 development.”
Takala writes before the Library can make a formal commitment, an ongoing independent evaluate of city-wide library needs to be completed. The report is expected in Q2 2018.
The opening of a North End waterfront library branch will require operating funding from City Council. Takala writes the Library “welcomes the opportunity to work with developers to create a public private partnership to assist with initial funding of a library building, however, we need to ensure we are able to secure sustainable sufficient operational funds for the library.”
Takala’s letter outlines the requirements for a library branch, stating “we think it is important that the public library and other public amenities located at Pier 8
not only serve the new residents of condo developments but also serve adjacent neighbourhoods in the North End and help make the Waterfront a destination for people from all across Hamilton and beyond”.
The letter was released Friday afternoon as part of the Hamilton Public Library Board agenda package. The Library Board will discuss the developers request as part of their monthly meeting on Wednesday March 21. The meeting begins at 6pm on the fifth floor of the Central Library branch and is open to the public. The Library Board streams their meetings at: http://www.hpl.ca/livestream
The Hamilton Public Library’s former North End branch at 502 James Street North was closed in June 2009.
There is a growing public campaign for the City of Hamilton to not sell the Discovery Centre building on Pier 8; with numerous people calling 0n Ward 2 City Councillor Jason Farr to stop the sale until public consultation occurs. Ideas for the Discovery Centre building include a library branch combining a civic museum and the Hamilton Public Library’s local history department.
A public meeting on the future of the Discovery Centre is scheduled for Thursday, March 29th, 7:00 pm at 294 James St N.
The City’s plans for the Pier 8 lands is presently subject to three appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board. Our story on the OMB prehearing is here: OMB Will Review Council’s Potential Conflict on Pier 8 as Both Approving Authority and Land Seller
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story mistakenly repeated the error in the HPL letter. The developer group is Urban Capital and Core Urban Inc, not Urban Core Inc as earlier stated. The Public Record regrets the error.


text:
Fiedler: Downtown Secondary Plan Height Max Subject to Tall Building Location and Design – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 23, 2018
On April 17, the proposed new Downtown Hamilton Secondary Plan is scheduled to go to Council’s Planning Committee for approval. It’s taken a while to get here. As The Hamilton Spectator reported after its release, “After two previous drafts, the revised plan is expected to be the city’s third and final kick at the can following a review that first launched in 2008.”
The plan has a clear vision for Hamilton’s core: intensification, particularly in the form of tall buildings up to 30 storeys in height, or the level of the escarpment, whichever is lesser. The new height limit aligns with the spate of development applications from developers for towers in the downtown planning area, as well as in adjacent neighbourhoods.
Hamilton’s current Downtown Secondary Plan was approved in 2001 after a period of relative stagnation following economic difficulties during the 1990s. That plan, called “Putting People First” anticipated modest development pressure and topped out at 15 storeys on Jackson Square and along a stretch of Main Street East.
The new draft, by contrast, responds to current development pressures and seeks to provide a framework for shaping growth in the downtown area for the foreseeable future—until 2031.
Once approved by Council, we can measure how successful the new Plan is by the number and timing of Official Plan Amendments going forward. If they begin to occur in the first five years after the Plan is approved with any regularity and call for significant departures then either the Plan misjudged where things were headed or the integrity of the Plan was undermined by Council decisions.
In recent months, the City’s Planning Division and Council have effectively defended a central piece of the new Downtown Secondary Plan: the 30 storey height limit. But it has done so without the full benefit of the accompanying design guidelines, which are intended to further refine what is permitted and curtail over-development on specific parcels and blocks.
This is why it is a mistake to simply look at the height map and conclude that with so much space designated “up to 30 storeys” every parcel so labelled could eventually yield at tall building of that height.
Indeed, policy 6.1.4.22 in the new Plan explicitly warns against that interpretation, stating:
Not every site in the Downtown identified as High-rise 1 or High-rise 2 can accommodate a tall building or is a suitable site for a tall building. The Tall Building Guidelines and Zoning By-law, shall establish the minimum criteria for assessing the suitability of an individual site for a tall building.
It remains to be seen how this will play out in practice, but the Planning Division has given itself and Council the necessary tools to exercise reasonable land-use control to protect against over-building, as well as to ensure future tall buildings enhance the spaces around them. That won’t please those who favour low- and mid-rise intensification exclusively, but it strikes an important balance and gives the City an increased ability to achieve its intensification aims without widespread redevelopment of existing low-rise housing.
To understand how this is intended to work, you need to drill-down in the new Plan’s accompanying Tall Buildings Guidelines to sections 3.0 Contextual Considerations and 4.0 Building Articulation, which establish how a tall building should fit into the built fabric and the design expectations that its base and tower must achieve.
Some of these are requirements are quantifiable and have been included in the Zoning By-law amendments that Council will consider for approval next month. Of particular importance is the requirement for minimum setbacks from the street line and stepbacks from the lot-line, with the latter increasing at 22 and 44 metres in height, as well as a minimum separation between towers.
The intent is to have new tall buildings sit on low-rise podiums that establish a human-scale interface at street-level, while also reducing wind and shadowing impacts on pedestrians.
Critics suggest this approach could become formulaic and it could. But the Plan allows via policy 6.1.4.20 that, “it is not the intent of the Downtown Hamilton Tall Building Guidelines to limit creativity and innovation in design … alternative built forms shall be permitted, subject to demonstrating good planning principles and meeting the intent and vision of the policies of this Plan.”
This ensures the Plan isn’t too rigid or prescriptive. Alternative built forms are permissible without an Official Plan Amendment, but a site specific rezoning (or possibly a minor variance) would be needed.
Though hardly fool-proof, the new Plan’s policies aim to encourage applications for tall buildings on larger sites, such as parking lots, that can readily accommodate them, without unduly impeding the reasonable development of other sites.
So, there is a need for nuance in assessing whether the plan will simply produce a “forest of towers” downtown. A marked shift has taken place and Hamilton appears set for another high-rise construction boom. But the new Plan gives us a framework to more sensitively shape the built fabric added to our downtown core if the political will exists to enforce it.
This post has focused on tall buildings because the new Downtown Secondary Plan appears set to usher in a new era that could see many built. However, the Plan also envisions reinvestment via retrofitting existing structures and the eventual redevelopment of certain areas at a more modest low- and mid-rise scale, especially along the edges of the planning area east of James Street.
The planning area is quite diverse in terms of physical fabric and includes parking lots and low-rise areas. As is the case whenever height and density permissions are increased, we can expect speculative activity and land assembly to occur. We can only hope that neither will be too excessive—or disruptive to the plan and it’s guiding principles, such as “build on existing strengths” and “recognize the value of modest improvements and changes”.
The new Plan also includes policies that reach beyond design and what can be built to allow increased flexibility in permitted uses. It speaks to how the public realm should be improved, how our built heritage will be preserved, how development might produce what provincial policies refer to as “complete communities”, and how higher-density development might be leveraged to provide community benefits.
Over the next few weeks subsequent posts will explore further these aspects of the new Plan.
Stay tuned.


text:
Hamilton Public Health Recommends Fire Department Be Equipped with Naloxone – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 19, 2018
Pending Council ratification next Wednesday, Hamilton’s fire department will begin stocking and administering naloxone as part of their medical responses when they suspect a patient is experiencing a drug overdose.
Naloxone is a commonly used medication which reverses the effects of opoids, and can be administered as a nasal spray. Hamilton Public Health says in 2017, 453 people were revived using naloxone kits distributed by the Public Health department.
The Hamilton Fire Department responded to 234 calls where an overdose was suspected in 2017; the staff report does not state how many calls that the Fire Department was first on scene.
The Fire Department will be equipped with the nasal spray kit, which will be funded by Ontario’s Ministry of Health.
Councillor’s unanimously approved the recommendation during their Board of Health meeting today.


text:
Office of the Fire Marshal Proposing Public Reporting of Fire Response Times Province-Wide – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 5, 2018
Fire departments across Ontario will be required to release their response times starting in 2020.
The Office of the Fire Marshal of Ontario and Emergency Management (OFMEM) posted a regulatory notice in February.
Under the new regulation, municipal fire services will be require to complete a yearly report on response times to be presented to the local council. The OFMEM will post the reports for the public on its website.


text:
OMB Will Review Council’s Potential Conflict on Pier 8 as Both Approving Authority and Land Seller – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 2, 2018
Lawyer Mary L. Flynn-Guglietti described it as something she has never seen in her 30-plus years as a planning lawyer.
Tuesday’s Ontario Municipal Board Prehearing on the appeals against the City’s Pier 8 redevelopment plan turned into a series of heated arguments between City of Hamilton lawyer Michael Kovacevic, presiding OMB member Gerald Swinkin, with lawyers for the appellants often objecting to the City’s posture.
At the end of the day, the OMB prehearing could not be completed and another hearing date is needed to continue arguments.
At stake for City Council is the ability to sell the Pier 8 lands this year.
For two industrial Hamilton Port Authority tenants appealing, their ability to continue their industrial operations on Hamilton’s Port is at stake. The other appellant, Harbour West Neighbours, is arguing for the future composition of their neighbourhood on Hamilton’s West Harbour.
OMB prehearings determine the issues list for the full hearing that follows; the matters that will be considered by the Board and argued by opposing lawyers. In advance of the prehearing, the parties exchange lists, and where there is disagreement they argue in front of the prehearing.
In this case, neither side reached an agreement on issues, and spent the day arguing case law, much to the weariness of Swinkin who repeatedly reminded parties they were there to determine the issues, not argue the full hearing.
“This is going to be a long day,” Swinkin declared late in the morning as Kovacevic repeatedly argued against straightforward issues proposed by appellants.
In a major loss for the City, Swinkin stated that he will not grant the City Council usual deference as the planning authority due to the City’s conflicting interest in selling Pier 8 with a goal of maximizing financial return.
All appellants submitted into evidence statements by the City and City Councillors stating that maximizing land value is one of the motivators for the City in rezoning the Pier 8 lands.
“The Board does have a public interest function,” Swinkin asserted to the objection of the City’s lawyer to his decision not to grant deference. “You may say they [the public] are not here and not appellants, but the Board will serve its public interest function and look out for those interests.”
Kovacevic tried to argue on behalf of City Council that the OMB should only be looking at the Pier 8 lands and not the wider area.
Swinkin responded the OMB must consider the context of the development within the wider community.
Pitman Patterson, representing Parrish & Heimbecker, took the lead for the industrial appellants, with Flynn-Guglietti representing Bunge Canada supporting points in common between these two appellants.
Herman Turkstra represented Harbour West Neighbours.
Due to the length of arguments on Tuesday, the OMB was not able to complete the pre-hearing process.
Another prehearing date has been set for June 5, the City of Hamilton has located the hearing at the Glanbrook Municipal Centre.
The City’s process for selling the Pier 8 lands continues, with the five shortlisted development groups expected to provide their Request for Proposal documents to the City this month.
Until the issues list is finalized and approved by the OMB for the full hearing, it is not known how the hearing could impend the City’s plan to sell the Pier 8 lands this summer. Depending on what issues the industrial appellants are allowed to argue, the OMB’s consideration could include restricting development on the east side of Pier 8.
The Public Record will attend the full prehearing and hearing on this file.


text:
The Public Record Email Edition for Monday, March 20, 2018 Hamilton's Dental Health Emergency – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 19, 2018
ThePublicRecord.ca
Email Edition for Monday, March 20, 2018
Hamilton’s Dental Health Emergency
[if mso]>	<![endif]
[if mso]>

<![endif]
[if mso]>                <![endif]
Development will be the topic of mainstream conversation this week. From Brad Lamb’s Television City officially appealing to the OMB, the expected release of the Downtown Secondary Plan later today, and the potential of a new library branch at the West Harbour. I have these topics covered in the newsletter below.
The opening note today is important, and something that most of us take for granted; our oral health. For a large number of Hamiltonians, the only dental care they can receive is an extraction at the emergency room as they and their children don’t have dental coverage.
A report from Hamilton’s Medical Officer of Health Dr. Elizabeth Richardson says public health dental staff screened 17,122 elementary students in the 2016/17 school year; 1471 of these kids needed urgent dental care, another 3244 needed preventive dental care.
The statistics for Grade 2 students are very concerning, 42% have a history of tooth decay, 1 in 10 “require urgent dental care”, and nine schools report “very high rates of untreated cavities”.
42% of Grade 2 students have a history of tooth decay, 1-in-10 Grade 2 students require urgent dental care, and nine of our schools – the majority of them in the Lower City – have “very high rates of untreated cavities”.
There’s another trend the report is revealing, as the Lower City gentrifies as Real Estate Investment Trusts drive up rental rates, lower income families are being forced to move into the poorly serviced suburbs. A map (above) in the report shows that postal code L9A is now seeing the same number of children requiring oral day surguries at Hamilton’s hospitals as our poorer Lower City neighbourhoods.With both municipal and provincial elections this year, we need to ask our politicians what they are doing to address poverty, oral health, and how they will ensure as vulnerable populations are forced to move to the suburbs that services are available to them.  Full Story on The Public Record here.
Thanks for subscribing, I’m always interested to hear your thoughts and ideas for the newsletter, I read every email you send me at joey@thepublicrecord.ca
– Joey Coleman
Tonight
Tomorrow
Next Week


text:
TPR Newsletter for March 21, 2018: Brad Lamb Looking to Build More Skyscrapers – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 21, 2018
The Public Record publishes a regular newsletter edition providing up-to-date news of what is happening at City Hall, a preview of upcoming news, exclusive commentary, listing of civic events, and links to interest news stories about municipal affairs and stories that better inform our civic discussion. Find our archive and sign-up here.
Brad Lamb is planning to build a series of 30 storey buildings in Downtown Hamilton, we learned from him yesterday in response to questions from Ward 2 Councillor Jason Farr during planning committee's debate on Lamb's Television City development. Lamb filed an OMB appeal against Council last week after staff recommended denying his project on Jackson Street West.
Lamb stood in front of Council's planning committee fielding a series of questions from Farr. Lamb repeatedly stated that he was hoping to reach a negotiated settlement with Farr and the community to allow him to build two towers, saying he's willing to negotiate on height.
City staff are firm the site is appropriate for one tall building of 20 to 21 storeys in height. The translation of the Escarpment height limit into storeys was new information yesterday.
Farr asked Lamb "Are you at a point where you still feel Hamilton is a great place to invest"?
This is a question a professional politician doesn't ask without already knowing the answer.
"I'm incredibly excited about this city", Lamb responded, saying that he is already looking at other development properties in Downtown Hamilton, and was in town yesterday to look at another. Lamb stated he will be bring forth more tall building applications shortly.
What does this mean? The only thing for sure is that he's planning more applications. Here's a scenario that see everyone "win":
Lamb's Television City sales were marketed to investors seeking income properties; these are sales that will be mostly transferable to other Downtown Hamilton locations. The present owners of a few of the large Downtown surface parking lots have consulted with planning staff in recent months about 30 storey buildings on their sites; the Tivoli site at 108 James Street North is sitting vacant and pre-approved for 22 storeys, and the new Downtown Secondary Plan pre-zones large parts of the Downtown.
With the new Secondary Plan enabling quicker approval for conforming tall buildings: Lamb can quickly change Television City into one 21-storey premium quality live-in condo building, reach a settlement with Farr and the Durand community, transfer his investor sales into more centrally located tall buildings, and all parties can take a win. Farr wins in Durand, once the construction starts on tall buildings in Beasley, Council can create the John/Rebecca park which be a big win for Farr, and Lamb's will move forward his projects in Hamilton continuing his momentum as the GTHA's condo king.
Lamb has a track record of building, no matter how he play his cards, it's fairly safe to say we'll be looking up at more construction cranes downtown very soon.
– Joey Coleman
Frank Palin is the everyday person who does good, just being a great person. You may know him as the singing HSR 51-University bus driver; I know him as the person who I admire for his humility and dedication to his family. Frank always greets his passengers with a smile; and make each one of them feel special.
Yesterday, McMaster University announced that Frank is donating all the money, $950, from a student GoFundMe thanking him for being a great person, to a student bursary fund. Frank and his wife added $350 of their own funds to thank McMaster students for the GoFundMe. (The University is hoping to raise another $1700 to make the donation a permanent bursary)
A couple of months ago, I chatted with Frank from Downtown to the campus. A student who got off the same bus as me. As we walked, they said with some excitement "Frank knows your name", forget my guest lecturing and everything else about me, Frank knowing me was the greatest honour, and it truely is.
Other students shared with me stories about Frank, one student talked about how in her first year, she took Frank's bus to Dundurn on the Friday at the  beginning of reading week. "He wished me a safe reading week. I got on his bus the Tuesday after reading week, and he asked me how my reading week was".
It's truly the small things that a difference.
For many McMaster students, HSR operators are the first off-campus Hamiltonians they meet, the first impression of our wider community. We're lucky to have Frank as our representative.
Tonight
Next Week
Next Month
Newsletter top photo: Brad Lamb speaks to City Council's Planning Committee yesterday.


text:
TPR Newsletter for March 20, 2018: Television City is About Tower Separation, Not Height – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 20, 2018
The Public Record publishes a regular newsletter edition providing up-to-date news of what is happening at City Hall, a preview of upcoming news, exclusive commentary, listing of civic events, and links to interest news stories about municipal affairs and stories that better inform our civic discussion. Find our archive and sign-up here.
Planning policy and implementation are interwoven with each other, and without both being strong; neither can achieve community goals.
The newest final draft version of Downtown Secondary Plan does a better job of balancing community interests than the revised draft released in October; but that statement on its own isn’t saying much because the October draft gave land speculators much and the community little.
The most interesting change – which is the result of community pressure – is proposed strong protections for rental housing and renters who are displaced by development. The policy requires new mid-rise and tall buildings to replace demolished rental units, and to have “an acceptable tenant relocation and assistance plan addressing the right to return to occupy the replacement housing at similar rents, the provision of alternative accommodation at similar rents, and other assistance to lessen the hardship, is provided.”
With the Wellington Arms for sale as a “hi-rise redevelopment site”, these new protections are very likely to encounter their first test as those tenants are displaced. We’ll quickly find out what the City deems to be “acceptable” for tenants in this policy.
Ultimately, the new Secondary Plan is only as good as Council’s willingness to enforce it.
The Secondary Plan references numerous other policies, and cannot be read on its own. The Public Record will have more analysis and in-depth review of the Plan in the coming days as we take time to understand it in the context of these other policies.
Brad Lamb’s Television City will be debated by City Councillors on Planning Committee this morning. The debate online has raged about height; when the issue of planning on the site is about intensity of development resulting from proposing two towers where the City’s tall building guidelines – and development best practices – state there should be one tower built.
“Tower separation” in planning language, is an important part of building a well functioning community of tall buildings. Brad Lamb’s attempt to build two tall buildings on the site is about volume; he’ll get more per-square foot, and more square footage, from two towers than he’ll get with the one tower of 15 to 25 storeys (depending on design) that Hamilton’s tall building guidelines suggest could be built on the site.
Lamb’s statements about his appeal have been consistent, he’s willing to negotiate on height, but not the number of towers. When a person is firm on a matter; that’s a good indication of what the primary issue really is.
City staff were clear in their report they can support a tall building on the site; with the proper design characteristics expected of a tall building on the site in relation to the surrounding neighbourhood and at street level.
Lamb’s declared that he is taking the City to the Ontario Municipal Board for “non-decision”. Other developers have gone for “non-decision” in the hours prior to a Council denying their applications; depending on the OMB member who conducts the hearing, it is possible the Board will conduct the hearing based upon Council’s denial, and not the most advantageous “non-decision” for the developer.
As for betting on the outcome of the OMB hearing; by the time the Board conducts its hearing, the new LPAT will have made rulings, and the Board will be under pressure to be more deferential to local planning policies. Add to the mix the City has Tall Building Guidelines it can support at the Board, and a Design Review Panel of professionals who did not support two towers; the conditions exist for Lamb to lose.
I encourage you to take 30 minutes to watch a talk by renowned planner and urban designer Ken Greenberg in Hamilton last year (Greenberg starts at 6:40) where he discussed planning for high density development. It will help to explain the planning principles involved in the City’s tall building guidelines and height limits.
Thanks for reading,
Joey Coleman
The following are stories The Public Record is tracking today
Tonight
Tomorrow
Next Week
Next Month
Newsletter top photo: City of Hamilton map showing areas where children requiring emergency oral day surgery live.


text:
Federal Government CRA Audit Finds City Owes $1.4-Million in HST Reassessment – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 23, 2018
Canada Revenue Agency says the City of Hamilton owed the federal government $1.4-million in additional HST charges for the period of January 2014 to June 2016.
The City budget portion of that cost is $900,000, with the remaining $500,000 to be paid by the Hamilton Police Service, and the Hamilton Public Library. UPDATE: The Hamilton Police portion of this is $89,000.
“There were some charges we thought we did not need to charge HST, and flow though with vendors where we didn’t charge HST”, the City’s General Manager of Corporate Services Mike Zegarac.


text:
Fiedler: Multi-Unit Family-Friendly Housing Key Part of Downtown Plan – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 12, 2018
Tuesday night Jason Thorne, Hamilton’s General Manager of Planning and Economic Development, and Steve Robichaud, its Chief Planner, shared the stage at Mills Hardware on King Street East with Raise the Hammer editor Ryan McGreal to talk about the City’s new Downtown Secondary Plan (DTSP), which will go to Council’s Planning Committee next week for approval.
The well attended event, organized by the Useful Knowledge Society, was intended to give interested members of the public an opportunity to better understand, not so much the fine details of the new DTSP, but the vision and thinking behind it.
In my first post in this series, I discussed how the draft of Hamilton’s new Downtown Secondary Plan (DTSP) released on March 19 responds to current development pressures, and, in particular, a recent wave of proposals for tall buildings, which the City defines as buildings 12 storeys or higher.
A report issued by the Ryerson City Building Institute (RCBI) last fall noted, “As development across the GTA shifts from sprawl to intensification as required by the province’s Growth Plan, most of the new homes being built in the GTA are in buildings greater than five storeys.”
Intensification promises to repair the built fabric of our core and renew its infrastructure, but thinking about who will be able to live, work, and play in Downtown Hamilton is also important. Robichaud and Thorne touched on this in their responses to questions and tried to convey how land-use planning tools can be used for place-making and to achieve what the Provincial Growth Plan and Hamilton’s Urban Official Plan (UHOP) terms “complete communities”. They also noted that a plan can’t prescribe who will live downtown or what businesses will locate in its storefronts and office space.
Perhaps, the most insightful moments revolved around questions related to affordability and ensuring a diverse mix of people and activities continue to enliven our downtown core—i.e. that it not become simply a theme-park for young urban professionals to paraphrase Ryan McGreal.
YIMBY (or Yes-In-My-BackYard) advocates for abundant housing see reducing impediments to increased supply as key to making housing more affordable in cities. Clearly adding new supply is part of the puzzle, but alone it won’t get where we need to go.
For starters, as the RCBI report notes, we need to determine if we are building the right supply:
As millennials get older and seek larger spaces, and baby boomers downsize from detached houses, we will need housing units that meet the needs and economic realities of these important demographic cohorts. Given the current housing affordability context and projected population increases, the GTA will require more family-oriented housing units in mid-rise and low-rise buildings in comparison to the stock built during the past several years.
Using data for the GTA from Urbanation (co-author of the report) they looked at condo units expected to be delivered in the next 5 years and found the following:
Alarming—for urbanists who favour intensification as a way to curtail sprawl, repair damaged urban fabric, and reduce automobility—the authors conclude that if current development trends continue “the proportion of family-appropriate housing available in location-efficient neighbourhoods (close to transit, employment, schools and services) will decrease, and affordability will further erode” and they argue this “means that young families will have to ‘drive to qualify’ for any type of unit, not just detached housing.”
Intensification as a policy will be seriously undermined if multi-unit family-friendly housing is not built in sufficient quantities.
So what does the new draft of Hamilton’s DTSP include to ensure the “right supply” of housing is added via intensification?
First, one of the plan’s “principles”, 6.1.2 (c) Promote Downtown Living, states “the Downtown Hamilton Secondary Plan identifies opportunities for a range of housing types catering to a variety of income levels and household characteristics.”
Second, two of its “objectives”,  6.1.3.3 Create Quality Residential Neighbourhoods and 6.1.3.7 Diversity of Housing, establish the importance and need for a diversity of housing, including recognition that “Downtown’s livability and prosperity is connected to the provision of housing that meets the requirements of a diverse population with varying housing needs.”
Third, under 6.1.4 General Land Use Policies, 6.1.4.10 states “the development of housing with a full range of tenure, affordability, and support services shall be provided for and promoted throughout the Downtown in a full range of built housing forms in accordance with the policies of Section B.3.2 – Housing Policies of Volume 1 [of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan].”
Finally, returning to 6.1.3.7 Diversity of Housing, it is noted that “Providing housing to a wide range of residents that is affordable, secure, of an appropriate size, and located to meet the needs of people throughout their life is the goal of an inclusive Downtown and essential to the creation of complete communities.”
The goal of an inclusive Downtown and the creation of “complete communities” conform to the province’s Growth Plan, which states “[t]his Plan is about accommodating forecasted growth in complete communities” and defines them as:
Places such as mixed-use neighbourhoods or other areas within cities, towns, and settlement areas that offer and support opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to conveniently access most of the necessities for daily living, including an appropriate mix of jobs, local stores, and services, a full range of housing, transportation options and public service facilities. Complete communities are age-friendly and may take different shapes and forms appropriate to their contexts.
Technically, support for building and maintaining “complete communities” is already operative in Hamilton’s planning framework as municipal decisions in Ontario must conform to the province’s Growth Plan and the concept is embedded in various ways in policies found in Volume 1, Chapter B of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (UHOP) adopted by City Council in 2009.
In this context, the policies in the latest draft of the DTSP noted above are significant because they reinforce that a “complete communities” planning lens will be applied to downtown as a planning area.
How might this matter?
Let’s consider the controversy over Brad Lamb’s Television City project.
How much of the debate it engendered revolved around what kind of supply it contributes to our local housing market and what impact it might have on land acquisition costs and therefore the viability of other forms of supply and uses?
A narrow focus on height makes it easy to get caught in an endless repeat loop arguing over whether a proposed building should be 30 or 40 storeys. What kind of units, at what price, and in what form of tenure is not only important, but the more important takeaway based insights shared by Robichaud and Thorne at Mills Hardware last night is that certainty in terms of what heights are permitted is important because it feeds into the valuation of land.
The graphic found on page 3 of the RCBI report (discussed above) provides a glimpse at how land-use permissions and housing forms relate to affordability and demonstrates that the relationship between intensification and affordability is less straightforward if the needs of different households are considered.
So, beyond simply increasing housing supply via plans and policies that encourage infilling and redevelopment of brownfield sites and greyfields (see Definitions in the Growth Plan), planning for intensification must actively work to encourage construction of a diversity of housing forms in a context-appropriate way.
As a recent Evergreen Report on planning and engagement around rapid transit projects noted in relation to the Hurontario LRT:
Mississauga has a unique challenge in achieving suitable development along the downtown portion of the corridor, as its planning regulations have no height restrictions in the downtown which can create a mismatch between the value of the land and the local demand for development. The land use planning process was used to protect some parts of the corridor to ensure context-appropriate development.
The preceding needs to be parsed with care. Mississauga is seeing tall buildings constructed in its downtown. It speaks to a larger planning and development conundrum, especially where plans and infrastructural investment prime land for hyper-development: how to ensure space for the so-called “missing middle” of compact, dense low-rise housing that is generally more affordable for families and larger households than high-rise.
Tackling the tendency toward a small or tall polarity in our cityscape is a problem that requires rethinking the “where” and “how” of intensification—i.e. thinking about it as something that needs to occur more broadly and not just via development on “opportunity sites” in nodes or along corridors designated for change in plans.
Hamilton is a bit different. But not totally different. We can learn from other places that are further down the Smart Growth intensification road. But we are still subject to the same forces and our effective demand—i.e. local housing needs that can stimulate new supply—continues to be, if anything, fragile and uncertain.
As Brad Lamb put it in a recent appearance on Cable 14’s City Matters, the physical costs to build in Hamilton are the same as in Toronto, maybe slightly higher, but what the market will yield here is much less. That makes land values and soft costs more of a factor in whether a project will be viable.
The inclusion of larger two and three bedroom units in high-rise developments is complicated by the relative cost of existing low-rise houses in nearby inner city neighbourhoods. Simply put, if high-rise condo units are selling for $500-$600/sqft in Hamilton, then buyers would be able to find low-rise housing nearby that is comparable in price or less expensive. That puts a damper on new supply, especially in terms of two and three bedroom apartments (for now).
From this perspective is it possible to better grasp the challenge facing Hamilton city planners. With regard to “complete communities” and “diversity of housing” they are tasked with steering what will mostly be private-sector development. Regardless of how desirable the social component of our city-building aims are, some of them conflict with the exigencies of private investment, which appears set to continue to row the development boat.
So, our planners and City Council must walk a fine line when the most powerful tool they possess is the ability to say “yes” or “no” based on relevant land use policies. Perhaps, the most important takeaway from last night’s event is that both Robichaud and Thorne hinted that a “take whatever you can get” mentality is finally giving way and that’s a big step forward.


text:
Hamilton Pier 8 Bid Visuals Released: Wood Frame Buildings, Artist Lofts, Alt Hotel Among Ideas – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 7, 2018
Yesterday, the City has released renderings proposed by the development group bidding to buy Pier 8.
In addition to the renderings, the bid teams had to submit a  mix of real and fictional stories about how various types of people will relate to the proposed spaces.
The city is not releasing the bid documents which explain the concepts.
The winning bidder will be able to purchase the lands from the City of Hamilton, and pending the outcome of an ongoing Ontario Municipal Board appeal, develop their vision for the last large parcel of developable waterfront land in the Greater Golden Horseshoe area.
While limited, the four presentations do reveal the  effort put in by some of the groups in reaching into the local community, and mayn innovative ideas for the development. Without the bid documents released to give them context, here’s a look at some of the highlights of the proposals that are publicly revealing.
Tridel‘s plans are the least revealing and appears very cookie-cutter. There’s a bunch of generic buildings, a seniors residence, live/work lofts, commercial mixed-use childcare, and a community hub.
GulfDream‘s plan has three particularly interesting aspects.
They are partnering with the Art Gallery of Hamilton to move the AGH to move the gallery to the public space of Pier 8.
Local firm McCallum Sather Architects is the lead architectural firm, and is proposing wood framed building structures as part of a goal of reaching a LEED gold level certification for the entire development.
Architecturally the concepts propose some very interesting building designs and shapes, and appear to propose a variety of different woods for the construction.
The Waterfront Shores group’s presentation placards city inspiration of Hamilton’s older architecture for their choice of materials and design for Pier 8. This bid has the most renowned of all the architects, Bruce Kuwabara. Kuwabara was born in Hamilton.
Without the benefit of the City releasing the bid documents we cannot know for sure the purpose of the long slender buildings proposed on the east side of the Pier. The ongoing OMB appeal by the industrial port users is primarily about incompatibility of use between residential and loud dust producing industrial loading and unloading on the Harbour.
Do the slender buildings designed to serve has a buffer that will satisfy the industrial users in a settlement between this bidder and the industrial users if Waterfront Shores wins the bid?
By far the most detailed public presentation slides of any of the development groups is the one that is most local.
The Urban Capital / Core Urban bid provides the most details, and is most reflective of the public feedback that is been occurring in Hamilton for the past couple years on what various community stakeholders want to see on Pier 8.
The list of partners in the bid is long and extensive, any concern this bid will be unable to bring resources to bear to complete the development are alleviated by the out-of-town partners that are part of the bid.
The Public Record previously reported on this bid’s plan to include a public library branch as part of the development, and this is confirmed in their bid presentation as part of a 5576m² “urban commons” community use building.
This bid is the only one that lays out very clearly where affordable housing will be placed within the development and who will be managing it. The YWCA of Hamilton and Indwell will be managing the affordable housing. The total space for affordable housing is 7000m², approximately 7% of the residential use on the Pier.
Following public pressure, the City added a 5% affordable housing minimum to the bid requirements. The City did not specify if this be rental or condo, and allowed for above-market rate to be considered affordable.
“You got five percent of affordable housing on Pier 8 in this RFP that we never contemplated”, Ward 2 Councillor Jason Farr stated to a group of residents opposed to the sale of the Discovery Centre. (The “right of first negotiation” to buy the Discovery Centre is part of this bid, the proposals released on Friday do not include future ideas for the Discovery Centre).
Cobalt Connects is proposing a separate 1900m² of Live/Work space, which is further affordable housing as part of the bid.
Killam Apartment REIT will be operating two buildings rental housing with approximately 400 units. A Alt Hotel of 120 is proposed to be operated by Groupe Germain on the eastern side of the Pier. Overall, 103,600m² of market residential (rental and condo) is proposed. The hotel plan is for 7400m² .
The Other Bird and Equal Parts Hospitality, two well respected local restaurant groups are part of the bid to run approximately 1000m² of restaurant space. Another 840m² of restaurant space is planned to be operated by other companies. Relay Coffee is promising to open their second stand-alone coffee shop, Momentum Fitness is planning add to their chain as part of the bid team.
Laura deCarufel, editor-in-chief of Torstar’s The Kit, plans to open a “digital brand & pop-up space” as well as launching “a new digital publishing brand” that “will celebrate Hamilton’s exciting art and culture scene”.
The Urban Capital / Core Urban bid includes vegetable gardens as part of the landscaping.
The City is inviting residents to submit their feedback on the presentation materials between now and April 17, visit the City of Hamilton website to look at the presentations and submit your comments.


text:
Hamilton’s Lime Ridge Mall Submits Redevelopment Plan for Closed Sears Store – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 23, 2018
Lime Ridge Mall owner Cadillac Fairview wants to create a restaurant district as part of their redevelopment of the former Sears store that anchored the north side of Hamilton’s largest indoor shopping centre.
Last Tuesday (Apr 17), Cadillac Fairview submitted a formal planning application. This morning (Apr 23), they asked City of Hamilton planning staff to place a “hold” on their application.
The planning application is a public document, and The Public Record reviewed it this morning shortly after the “hold” was placed on the file.
The proposal is to demolish the existing structure which housed Sears, and to construct a new two storey anchor to the indoor mall, one restaurant addition attached to the shopping centre, two standalone restaurants in front of the new anchor, and two restaurants at the front of a two-storey 494 parking stall parkade structure.
The parkade will be connected to the mall by a pedestrian bridge, and the parkade’s two restaurants will feature rooftop patios.
The plan also envisions a new commercial office building between the planned parkade and the existing office building housing Bell Media’s Hamilton radio stations at 883 Upper Wentworth.
The submission was formally submitted a day before Mayor Fred Eisenberger, who Councillors Donna Skelly and Terry Whitehead say has been briefed on Cadillac Fairview’s longer term vision for the Central Mountain site, publicly moved that city staff approach Cadillac Fairview to see if they were interested in having mixed commercial and residential use on the property.
The Public Record’s practice is to wait for the Design Review or public notification stage of the planning process to report on these type of developments; as it is common for major details to change while developers conduct early meetings with city staff. To finalize their submissions, developers spend tens of thousands of dollars on professional consultants, engineers, and architects prior to the public meetings stage.
Cadillac Fairview met frequently with city officials prior to submitting this first application of their long-term vision for the 60-plus acre property. City planning files include a chronological index of staff action on the application. City staff scheduled a
Formal Consultation meeting of the Development Review Team the day after submission, and circulation of the file to city sections for comment had begun.
City staff are awaiting more information on how Cadillac Fairview wishes to proceed with the file.
Here are two site plans submitted in the file.


text:
Hamilton’s Mountain Plaza Proposing Two Mid-Rise Residential Buildings – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 22, 2018
SmartCentres is planning to redevelop the last remnant of the former Mountain Plaza Mall into residential mid-rise buildings. In mid-2017, SmartCentres formally submitted conceptual plans for two six-storey buildings on the north side of the property bordering Fennell Avenue at Upper James Street.
SmartCentres met with City Planning and Public Works staff in early April for a Formal Consultation meeting as they explore what opportunities exist for phrased redevelopment of the large retail site.
The planning file for the proposal shows it is in early stages, and SmartCentres is conducting market research to determine if there will be ground level commercial in the buildings, and determining the state of the residential market before finalizing their application.
The Public Record usually waits for the Design Review or public notification stage of the planning process to report on these type of projects; as it is common for major details to change while developers conduct early meetings with city staff. To finalize their submissions, developers spend tens of thousands of dollars on professional consultants, engineers, and architects prior to the public meetings stage.
Last week, Mayor Fred Eisenberger announced a plan for the City to approach Eastgate Square, Lime Ridge Mall, and Mountain Plaza to propose the malls explore residential development.
Mountain Councillors Donna Skelly and Terry Whitehead both state the Mayor was recently briefed on both the Lime Ridge Mall and Mountain Plaza planning applications.  Lime Ridge Mall made their intentions known during the Commercial Mixed-Use Zoning consultations, which granted them permission for residential mixed-use. The new Citywide Commercial Mixed Use Zoning is subject of a OMB appeal.
Both Skelly and Whitehead say they’ve been consulted by SmartCentres and Lime Ridge owner Cadillac Fairview on plans for residential mixed-use buildings.
The former indoor mall on the site was demolished starting a decade ago when the site was converted into a big box store format. SmartCentres said it was a $50-million redevelopment at the time.
In 2016, SmartCentres requested the City of Hamilton extend their demolition development charges credit, saying the 2008 recession impacted slowed their development plans. In March 2017, Council voted to extend 47,248.61 square feet of development credits worth $916,000.
Mall redevelopments into mixed-use communities is a North American wide trend, with commercial real estate development companies, planning schools, and municipal governments all planning for residential mixed-use with the changing economics of retail.


text:
McMaster Appeals to OMB on Main West Student Rez Proposal Prior to LPAT Taking Over – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 23, 2018
McMaster University has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board for non-decision in their application to build a student residence at 1190 Main Street West, the appeal was filed just before the OMB was eliminated in favour of the new Local Planning Appeal Tribunal.
McMaster’s appeal is one of over a dozen in Hamilton by development applicants seeking to protect their interests under the more developer friendly OMB rules rather than risk having to appeal under the new LPAT rules.
Hamilton’s Director of Planning and Chief Planner Steve Robichaud tells The Public Record that McMaster informed the City prior to filing the appeal. Robichaud says McMaster intends to treat their application as if they didn’t appeal and will go to Council for a full public hearing, including community consultations.
McMaster’s is proposing two twelve story buildings to house approximately 1500 students. If approved, the buildings will extend the campus further east on Main West to Dalewood Avenue, McMaster purchased numerous single family homes to secure the land for the development.
A key reason for McMaster to appeal for non-decision is that under the LPAT framework considerable weight will be given to the opinion of the city’s Design Review Panel.
DPR was very critical of the proposal for its design and massing, its choice of materials, and members stated that it will not fit within the neighbourhood and in its present form it represents poor planning.
In February, the panel advised McMaster to redesign the proposal, with many members stating that McMaster should look at a point tower on the western part that borders the present campus to achieve the number of units they are seeking while stepping down the building towards the east where it will abut single family residential zoning.
No date is yet been set for Council to consider the application, and no hearing dates have been set for the OMB appeal.
With McMaster’s OMB appeal, any decision of Council at a future Planning Committee public meeting would be considered a “settlement” offer and require OMB approval.
The Public Record registered with the OMB last week to receive updates on the appeal. Nearby residents can contact the Board to receive information.


text:
Pagoda Chop Suey House Sign Being Restored – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 22, 2018
The Pagoda Chop Suey House sign hangs at the corner of King Street East and John Street; one of the few remaining signs from the days of neon signs 50 years past. The Chop Suey House itself is long gone, moving out in 2012 when its building and the attached Treble Hall were saved and restored.
The Hamilton Municipal Heritage Committee is told the landmark sign is being restored, and last year, some of the neon tubing was replaced in the sign as the first phrase of the restoration. Current owner Yoke Group teased a photo of the sign with the caption “Stay tuned for some exciting news!” earlier in April.
The sign gained heritage protection in October when Council unanimously approved heritage designation for Treble Hall and the Pagoda Building under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.
The designation states the Pagoda Building is designed in part “its association with the Pagoda Chop Suey House, a long-running Chinese restaurant in the City and one advertised through a prominent neon sign.”
Legendary local musician Tom Wilson wrote, in his biographical book Beautiful Scars: Steeltown Secrets, Mohawk Skywalkers and the Road Home, that the Pagoda “sign is to downtown Hamilton what the Hollywood sign is to Hollywood”.
Hamilton no longer allows overhanging signs, unless the bylaw changes, the Pagoda sign will be one of only two grandfathered neon signs in the Gore Park District. The other grandfathered sign? Cheapies.
The former Pagoda restaurant is connected to Treble Hall and part of a renovation that will turn the space into rental apartments.


text:
Recycle Coach Privacy Breach Exposes Email Addresses of over 1000 City of Hamilton Recycling App Users – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 21, 2018
The City of Hamilton had to notify 1100 residents that their email addresses may now be known by spammers following a data breach by a city contractor.
Municipal Media Inc. operates the City’s “Recycle Coach” app, and informed the City last week they had failed to follow information security procedures to prevent unauthorized access to their mailing listserv, resulting in 1,100 Hamiltonians having their email address exported by the unauthorized user.
The City of New Westminster was very transparent about the breach, posting the full statement sent by Municipal Media Inc to municipalities. Over 55,000 email address were exposed.
“The perpetrator got access to MailChimp when one of our employees email accounts was hacked”, wrote Creighton Hooper, President of Municipal Media Inc.
Hooper provided no further details of how the account was compromised. In most similar cases, this is the result of an employee falling for phishing scam.
Recycle Coach created their Mailchimp listserv in December 2017 to promote new versions of their apps for devices such as Alexa and Google Home.
Municipal Media failed to implemented the simple security procedure of two-factor authentication.
Microsoft Regional Director and MVP for Developer Security Troy Hunt commented on this failure, noting that Mailchimp gives users a discount for implementing this simple security procedure.
Looks like a breach of @RecycleCoachApp’s @MailChimp account. Assuming the usual poor password and lack of 2FA vector, remember that @MailChimp will actually give you a *discount* if you enable 2FA! pic.twitter.com/6r6DYQVkad
— Troy Hunt (@troyhunt)
Password software company 1Password openly mocked Municipal Media for failing to implement strong passwords and in two-factor authentication. “When it comes to passwords, reduce, reuse, and recycle is not the way to go” tweeted 1Password to Municipal Media.
Municipal Media President Hooper says customers have responded to the breach by contacting them to “to let us know how much they like our service”.
Hooper ended his statement saying “We take security very seriously and have tightened our procedures to ensure that this doesn’t happen again. Our apologies and thank you for understanding”.
All evidence to the contrary on security.


text:
TPR Email Edition for April 16, 2018: HSR Ices The Ice Storm – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 16, 2018
The Public Record publishes a regular newsletter, we post it at the end of each day, sign up to get future editions delivered to your inbox in the mornings, or see our archives.
HSR’s on-duty staff this weekend performed commendably, reacting to storm conditions and closures with good quick decisions, and great communications.
Saturday afternoon, for over an hour, the HSR was forced to suspend all service on routes 21 to 41 due to road conditions.
The Public Works Roads response was poor, people playing Pokemon GO during the storm had better odds of finding a Pikachu than seeing a City of Hamilton salt truck.
On-duty HSR Superintendent Drew Westenburg harnessed his limited Saturday resources and responded excellently to the disruption.
The HSR Twitter account was active, updating passengers on the disruption, detours during the resumption of service, and even individually respond to people at bus stops tweeting where’s my bus?
The on-duty supervision team ensured people could stay on buses waiting for Mountain accesses to reopen, moved to position other buses at terminals in preparation for the resumption of service, and shuffled resources to get service back onto schedule after resumption.
Eventually, the City found salt trucks for one access – the Claremont – and HSR detoured using this single access. Minutes after opening, it was closed again, and the HSR had to wait for salt trucks to reopen the Jolley Cut.
During all of this, bus operators tell me communication from “control” – as they call HSR dispatch – was consistent, clear, and comphrensive. They were then able to relay information to passengers.
Saturday’s suspension of service was a nearly unprecedented event; it wasn’t just one or two accesses closed, it was all four central accesses closed, and dangerous road conditions city-wide. Retired HSR operators say the only time they can recall a suspension of service was during the Great Blizzard of ’77.
It wasn’t just accesses that were an issue; the 7-Locke route had two buses stuck at the top of Dundurn, other routes had to detour due to slippery hills, even the 4-Bayfront was impacted as the slight hill of Nash Road South was too slippery for buses to climb.
In all of this, the on-duty supervisors, dispatchers, and mechanics juggled these demands and kept the system operating. (It helped that HSR management planned in advance by pulling articulated buses off the road)
As the evening progressed, management assisted. The HSR Twitter account’s tone changed, tweets appeared to be by HSR’s Customer Service Manager Dennis Guy. The decision was made – after I called out this problem – to keep the MacNab Terminal open beyond the schedule 9pm closure.
Here are my takeaways:
1) Saturday’s on duty HSR supervisors should be publicly commended at the next Council meeting by the Mayor personally. They reacted exceptionally well.
2) Giving on-duty supervisory staff access to the HSR Twitter account was a very good decision. The non-PR tone of the tweets was exactly what riders needed to see, it was real. My personal favourite “Claremont access now open; detouring N-S routes up and down this one for now.” This gave us the information we needed – buses were operating, roads remained difficult, and things would change. No need for professional polish, Hamilton is still a blue collar city.
The impact of Saturday’s storm is not yet done for the HSR.
This coming Sunday the HSR will need to react as McMaster University’s rescheduled exams occur. Scheduled Sunday service to McMaster is one bus every 30 minutes, obviously not good enough for the thousands of students who need to be at exams at 9am.
I spoke to HSR Director Debbie Dalle Vedove this morning, and planning is underway to get students to their exams.
Monday
Development Industry Liaison Group discussed the Downtown Secondary Plan, implementation of Planning Act changes, and Parkland Dedication By-law review. [Agenda]
Public Works Committee approved three roads to be repaired using the $19-million Council is borrowing against future revenue, staff says the roads will only see their top 8cm treated and the treatments are expected to last 10 years. Burlington Street (Sherman to Nikola Tesla), Upper Gage (LINC to Mohawk), and Cannon (Sherman to James). If the City can receive “favourable pricing”, then Barton (Gage to Kenilworth, Sanford to Lottridge), Highway 5 (Mills to Evans), Osler (West Park to South), Upper Sherman (Southampton to Mohawk), Upper James (Fennell to Mohawk, Kennedy to Christopher) [Agenda]
Board of Health will discuss the new Hamilton Airshed Modelling system which will be used to identify sources of fine particulate matter in Hamilton, among its many uses. [Agenda]
Tuesday
Planning Committee will debate the proposed Downtown Secondary Plan, Hess Village Paid Duty Policing is back on the agenda and we could see the $50,000 per year cost absorbed by the City as costs of administering the special levy now exceeds the revenue of the program –  lawyer and Hess Village business owner Dean Collett is listed to speak on behalf  of Hess Village businesses, a staff update on the City’s growth mapping, and a motion calling on the Province to prioritize Council’s list of cases at the OMB they wish to see heard quickly. [Agenda]
Heritage Permit Review is handling five routine renovation and accessibility permits. This agenda is not available on the City website.
Wednesday
Council GIC will receive from Hamilton’s Elections Manager a policy outlining restrictions on use of city resources for election campaigning; the policy will allow City Councillors to use their websites, mailing lists, and City promoted Councillor Twitter accounts. Council watchdog Viv Saunders will address GIC on the issue. An update on PTIF funding, spoiler: no new bus barn yet. Mayor Eisenberger’s moving a motion that on its surface asks for something which is already happening – commercial mixed use zoning, which begs the question of why? There is one phrase in his motion that catches my error “shopping malls” – Eastgate, Lime Ridge, and Mountain Plaza all have plans in development.
In closed session, Council will get an update on the never-ending stadium fiasco litigation, and discuss potentially buying the former Hamilton Psychiatric Hospital lands. [Agenda]
Hamilton Public Library Board is looking at making the Terryberry Study Hall permanent, receiving a presentation on geographical library usage and demographic trends, a motion to expand digital collections. [Agenda]
Thursday
Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Task Force on Workforce Development (seriously, that’s the name Mayor Eisenberger gave it) will discuss education-industry-government partnerships to advance Hamilton’s workforce to attack more employers to the region. [Agenda]
Hamilton Municipal Heritage Committee will vote on designating three buildings or structures as Heritage Properties, among the list are the Cathedral Boys’ School and the Hamilton Water reservoir on the Kenilworth Access. The Book House in Ancaster is proposed to be removed from the possible designation list, to allow for its demolition. [Agenda]
Hamilton Police Services Board will receive a delegation from Kojo Damptey, the 2017 Freedom of Information statistics, 2017 Youth Crime statistics, and a letter from the International Village BIA concerned about a lack of community policies. [Agenda]
Friday
Grants Committee will approve the staff recommendations for 2018 City Enrichment fund grants for a wide variety of community services, events and programs. There were 313 applications this year for the $6,022,690 fund, City staff state that 17 applications meant the criteria for full funding, but were “underfunded” totalling $189,978 due meet the budget cap. [Agenda]
May
Newsletter top photo: HSR Bus on James Street last week


text:
TPR Email Edition for April 18, 2018: A Big Day for TPR – Launch of Our Press Club – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 18, 2018
The Public Record publishes a regular newsletter, we post it at the end of each day, sign up to get future editions delivered to your inbox in the mornings, or see our archives.
View Email Edition in your web browser
Today is the big day, the launch of The Public Record’s monthly patron membership model to create a sustainable online open local news outlet right here in Hamilton. The first of its kind in Canada.
As a member of our Press Club, your financial support enables The Public Record to provide news for all Hamiltonians, and to continue to grow our in-depth coverage. In the coming months, we plan to commission freelancers to ensure every ward race is covered, and to expand our coverage at City Hall.
Members of our Press Club receive invitations to our regular Press Club coffee meet-ups, talks, and other events. Members of the Press Club receive their own Fact That Mug as our thanks for your support.
Our next Press Club coffeehouse is May 6, become a member today to receive your invitation to the event.
Thank you for your support,
Joey
The intersection of student politics and LED lighting may not seem interesting on the surface, but it does provide us an opportunity to explore the growth in the relationship between McMaster Students Union (MSU) and Hamilton City Hall.
As some of you know I was a higher education reporter for Maclean’s and contributor to The Globe and Mail for the first four years of my journalism career, I read platforms from hundreds of student politicians, and often remarked ” you can only say free tuition so many ways”.
Rare is the student politician with an original platform plank, MSU President Elect Ikram Farah‘s LED lighting plank is one of those ones:
“Students have identified the need for increased lighting in low-traffic areas on campus as well as in off campus student-populated areas. The issue at hand is that poor lighting, broken lights and lack of light poles are contributing to the safety of students on and off campus. The City of Hamilton is currently beginning to upgrade street lighting on residential streets throughout the city over the next three years. However, while in office, the MSU will prioritize working with the Hamilton municipal government to implement more LED lighting on campus and off campus within the next year.”
I read this platform and immediately started looking into how it could be implemented. Turns out, LED light installation in Ward 1 is happening this summer. However, this was not obvious to me, and even staff I talked to didn’t know this.
LED light installation on side-streets started in Downtown Hamilton this year – in large part because it’s a “pedestrian priority area”. In hindsight, City Hall should treat Ainslie Wood and Westdale with the same pedestrian priority lenses. When they failed to, as a journalist, I should’ve caught this oversight and asked why. I failed to catch this.
How did LED lighting become a student politics platform?
Two years ago the McMaster Silhouette started covering how City Hall impacts students. This coverage help inspire student politicians to creating a new position, Associate Vice President Municipal Affairs in 2017, to lead their advocacy efforts at City Hall.
With the MSU engaged on “bread and butter” issues like this, they will see increasing results from their advocacy. Quite a change in only two years time.
Free! Former Winnipeg Mayor and former Ontario Environment Minister, now Executive Director of the Pembina Institute Glen Murray will speak next Wednesday evening about “Why Mid-Sized Cities Will be Sustainability Leaders”. Tickets are free, but limited. RSVP here.
Canada’s top representative in Washington, Ambassador David MacNaughton will speak to the Ontario Chamber of Commerce’s AGM next Friday at the Sheraton during a luncheon from 12:00 to 1:30pm. His schedule is not yet public for the day, it is likely he’ll meet with local officials about steel and aluminum tarrifs, and with the City’s economic development office about cross-border trade.
Tickets for the luncheon are on sale from the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce, at $60/$70 each.
This Week
Next Week
May
Newsletter top photo: The Public Record mugs at our last Press Club event


text:
TPR Email Edition for April 17, 2018: Parking Versus People: Outdated Bylaws – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 17, 2018
The Public Record publishes a regular newsletter, we post it at the end of each day, sign up to get future editions delivered to your inbox in the mornings, or see our archives.
Hamilton's outdated zoning bylaws create some absurd situations, bylaws written as far back as the 1950s remain in effect for parts of the "new" City of Hamilton. (The "new" City of Hamilton is now 18 years old)
In Downtown Hamilton, a mix of old zoning regulations exist, combined with a 2005 Secondary Plan that was implemented at a time of economic downturn, it is costly and unpredictable to develop.  Today, Planning Committee approved (pending Council ratification) the new Downtown Secondary Plan which will implement permissive zoning, clear height limits, and guidelines for design.
While this will address Downtown planning, outdated bylaws will continue to reign elsewhere in Hamilton.
A great example of this problem is the City opposing the building of an additional bachelor and additional one bedroom unit in a existing apartment building at 2 Grant Blvd. across from University Plaza in Dundas because they lack parking spots.
For those not familiar, University Plaza is Hamilton's second best serviced transit area outside of the downtown core. During rush hour there are 14 buses per hour operate to Downtown, for comparison, there are ten Route 1-King buses per hour from Eastgate to Downtown, six B-Line buses per hour, for a combined total 16 buses per hour.
The Public Record didn't attend this Committee of Adjustment meeting because this application seemed straight forward. Thankfully, Hamilton Community News' Dundas Star was aware of staff opposition, attended, and filed a story about the City's opposition.
Hamilton's rental market is facing a crunch, rents are rising vacancies are down, new apartment building approvals take years to complete the planning process, the OMB/LPAT is backlogged, and Hamilton needs new rental housing now.
Secondary suites and laneway housing are two ideas that are gaining popularity to relatively quickly bring online new housing. But, these forms of housing often encounter outdated zoning bylaws.
The Grant Blvd application is novel, proposing to convert basement storage units into small apartments as a minor variance. However, City staff have to oppose.
HCN reports that some Committee of Adjustment members suggested the application should be a complete rezoning, the owner tabled the application to consult further with staff.
The cost of a zoning application will be approximately $20,000, or $10,000 per unit in case. This doesn't include the cost of planners, architects, and consultants to complete the application. The cost of a surface parking spot is $10,000.
Hamilton's housing crunch will not be solved by one, or even a few big buildings alone. It needs secondary units and code-compliant new suites in existing buildings.
If we can't get units built across from a major transit node, then our City is doing it wrong.
– Joey Coleman
The Hamilton Public Library, alongside the City of Hamilton's Our Future Hamilton and McMaster Continuing Education, is launching a series of six public talks to build civic engagement capacity in Hamilton. The first is May 16 discussing Mental Health, Safety, Addictions and Young People, following by Minimum Wage, Small Businesses and Hamilton's Economy on May 23, and Affordable Housing, Transportation and Aging in the Community on May 30.
Full list of speakers, and future topics on the McMaster CCE website.
May
Newsletter top photo: Cardinal outside of my office last week.