Melissa Kiddie

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a five-building industrial subdivision.

The proposal included relocating and expanding an existing wetland to create a natural heritage compensation area.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts, finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed to the Urban Hamilton Official Plan, and represented good land use planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, approving the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments, and approved the Draft Plan of Subdivision in principle on an interim basis pending finalization of conditions.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit a mixed-use development with 840 residential units and commercial/office space on lands previously designated for employment.

The central issue was whether the site constituted an 'Employment Area' under the 2024 Provincial Planning Statement.

The Tribunal found the site was physically separated from other employment lands, did not meet the definition of an Employment Area, and was therefore available for redevelopment.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's expert evidence on land economics, compatibility, connectivity, and natural heritage, concluding the proposal represented good planning, optimized land use, and adequately protected adjacent natural features.

The appeals were allowed and the amendments approved.

The appellant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval to permit a 20-storey and 18-storey mixed-use development.

The Tribunal found that the proposed development represented over-intensification and was not compatible with the existing low-to-mid-rise neighbourhood character.

The Tribunal also noted the lack of a required Visual Impact Assessment to evaluate impacts on adjacent cultural heritage resources, including Battlefield Park.

The appeal was dismissed, and the Zoning By-law Amendment was not approved.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a site plan application and appealed certain conditions of a provisional consent to sever a property in an employment area.

The parties reached an agreement on the consent conditions prior to the hearing.

The sole remaining issue was whether two disputed site plan conditions, which required the applicant to monitor private wells on adjacent properties and provide a contingency plan, could be imposed by the City.

The Tribunal found that section 41(7) of the Planning Act provides a finite list of permissible site plan conditions and does not authorize conditions pertaining to works or monitoring outside the boundaries of the subject property.

The Tribunal approved the consent and site plan applications without the disputed conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 2-storey agri-tourism facility on an active organic farm.

The proposed development included overnight accommodation for up to 12 guest rooms to educate the public about organic farming.

The Tribunal found that the proposed 'Agri-tourism Retreat' is a unique concept that meets the intent of the Provincial Policy Statement, the Greenbelt Plan, and the Rural Hamilton Official Plan as an on-farm diversified use.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's expert evidence regarding land use planning and natural heritage, concluding that the development would not negatively impact agricultural operations or natural heritage features.

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis, approving the amendments in principle.