Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: February 9, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004119, OLT-22-002835 (Formerly PL190132)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: 1019 Wilson Storage GP Corporation Subject: Zoning By-law No. 19-039 Municipality: City of Hamilton OLT Case No: OLT-22-002835 Legacy Case No: PL190132 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-002835 Legacy Lead Case No: PL190132 OLT Case Name: 1019 Wilson Storage GP Corp. v. Hamilton (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: 1019 Wilson Storage GP Corporation Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit a 5-storey mixed-use building containing self-storage, retail and third-party commercial uses Reference Number: ZAC-22-025 Property Address: 1019 Wilson Street West Municipality/UT: Hamilton/Hamilton OLT Case No: OLT-22-004119 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004119 OLT Case Name: 1019 Wilson GP Storage Corp. v. Hamilton (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Heard: January 31, 2023 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
1019 Wilson Storage GP Corporation	Aaron Platt
City Of Hamilton (“City”)	Patrick Macdonald

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY SHARYN VINCENT ON JANUARY 31, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

11019 Wilson Storage GP Corporation appealed By-law 19-039, passed by Council of the City of Hamilton, which imposes a minimum front yard setback of 250 metres, thereby effectively prohibiting any further retail warehouse uses in the C7, Arterial Commercial zone governing lands in the Wilson Road West and Shaver Road area, including the subject site (Case No. OLT-22-002835). Prior to the passage of By-law 19-039, the proposal subject of the site specific rezoning under consideration at this proceeding, would have been permitted by By-law 05-200 (Case No. OLT-22-004119).

2The City, while in attendance at the hearing, neither opposed, nor supported the site specific proposal.

3The Tribunal therefore heard the uncontroverted evidence of David McKay who was qualified to assist the Tribunal with opinion evidence in areas of land use planning.

CONTEXT

4As alluded to in the introduction, the subject corner site bookends a corridor of large format retail warehouse uses/power centres often characteristic of arterial commercial zones.

5The development proposed for this high profile site envisions a five storey urban format self-storage facility which incorporates internalized vehicular circulation, loading and parking. The principal storage use is complemented by a three storey commercial component oriented to the corner thereby screening the existing hydro transmission station, which otherwise bifurcates the Shaver Road frontage of the site.

6Detached residential uses abut to the north and the proposed site plan incorporates, protects and enhances the existing hedgerow to screen the one-way driveway exiting from the building to Shaver Road, and the existing hydro transformer beyond. The site specific zoning adopts the range of retail uses permitted in the C7 zone and adds financial establishment to the list. Parking for these uses is provided on site proximate to the uses.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

7The Tribunal is satisfied, and adopts the uncontroverted opinion evidence of David McKay, that:

(a) The proposed non-residential building is compatible with existing and planned surrounding uses;

(b) The proposed amendment will provide for built form intensification in keeping with the overarching provincial and Official Plan objectives to optimize existing infrastructure while providing opportunities which further the achievement of complete communities;

(c) The proposed self-storage, service commercial and limited retail uses are permitted within the Arterial Commercial designation;

(d) The site, located at the corner of a major arterial and a collector road, is well suited to accommodate both the built form and mix of uses proposed;

(e) The proposed development is designed to a high quality, implementing the urban design policies and aligned with the guidelines of the City of Hamilton;

(f) The proposed amendment is consistent with and conforms to relevant Provincial policy; and

(g) Through the required site plan approval, not before the Tribunal, the proposed development will incorporate low impact development and other sustainable measures to assist in achieving resilience to climate change through such design features as roof top solar panels.

8The Tribunal therefore approves in principle the development as proposed in the attached draft amending by-law, subject to the Tribunal being advised that the City has finalized the form and content of the amending by-law.

9The Appellant undertakes to withdraw the appeal to By-law 19-039 Case No. OLT-22-002835 upon approval in principle of the attached amending By-law. Case No. OLT-22-002835 will be closed upon confirmation that the appeal has been withdrawn.

INTERIM ORDER

10THE TRIBUNAL THEREFORE ORDERS that the appeal subject of Tribunal Case No. OLT-22-004119 is allowed in part and hereby directs that By-law 05-200, as amended, is to be hereby further amended generally in accordance with the amending instrument attached hereto and forming part of this Order as Attachment 1.

11THE TRIBUNAL WITHHOLDS ITS FINAL ORDER until in receipt of written confirmation that the form of the amending instrument has been finalized.

“Sharyn Vincent”

SHARYN VINCENT

VICE-CHAIR

Website: olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248

The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.

Attachment 1

1019 Wilson Storage GP Corp. v. Hamilton (City), 2023 CanLII 10097

Case Summary