Ontario Land Tribunal

Issue Date: November 05, 2024

Case No(s).: OLT-24-000232 OLT-24-000234

Proceeding Commenced Under subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 2480545 Ontario Inc. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit development of three towers 24, 21, and 16 storeys tall, comprising 583 residential units Reference Number: UHOPA-20-027 Property Address: 1629, 1635, 1637 and 1655 Main Street W Municipality/UT: Hamilton OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000232 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000232 OLT Case Name: 2480545 Ontario Inc. v. Hamilton (City)

Proceeding Commenced Under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 2480545 Ontario Inc. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit development of three towers 24, 21, and 16 storeys tall, comprising 583 residential units Reference Number: ZAC-20-042 Property Address: 1629, 1635, 1637 and 1655 Main Street W Municipality/UT: Hamilton OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000233 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000232 OLT Case Name: 2480545 Ontario Inc. v. Hamilton (City)

Proceeding Commenced Under subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit development of 10-story student rental residence comprised of 359 units Reference Number: ZAC-23-020/UHOPA-23-008 Property Address: 17 Ewen Road Municipality/UT: Hamilton OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000234 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000234 OLT Case Name: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp v. Hamilton (City)

Proceeding Commenced Under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit development of 10-story student rental residence comprised of 359 units Reference Number: ZAC-23-020/UHOPA-23-008 Property Address: 17 Ewen Road Municipality/UT: Hamilton OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000235 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000234 OLT Case Name: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp v. Hamilton (City)

Heard: September 25, 2024 by video hearing

Appearances

Parties	Counsel
17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp.	Ira Kagan, Sarah Kagan (in absentia)
2480545 Ontario Inc.	Ira Kagan, Sarah Kagan (in absentia)
City of Hamilton	Patrick MacDonald
Mondelez Canada Inc.	Mithea Murugesu, Kim Mullin (in absentia)

Memorandum of Oral Decision Delivered by Bita M. Rajaee on September 25, 2024 and Order of the Tribunal

1This was the second Case Management Conference ("Second CMC") before the Tribunal with respect to appeals under sections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act ("Act") by two applicants (collectively, "Applicants"):

a. 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp., relating to lands located at 17 Ewen Road in Hamilton ("Ewen Lands"); and

b. 2480545 Ontario Inc., relating to lands located at 1629, 1635, 1637, and 1655 Main Street West in Hamilton ("Main Street Lands").

2The Appeals have been brought due to the City of Hamilton's ("City") failure to make a decision within the statutory timeframes of the Act on applications for an Official Plan Amendment ("OPA") and Zoning By-law Amendment ("ZBA") to facilitate development. On the Ewen Lands, a 19-storey building is proposed containing approximately 665 units. On the Main Street Lands, three tall buildings (20, 26, and 28 storeys) atop a five-storey podium are proposed with a total of approximately 866 units.

3A CMC took place on August 20, 2024 ("First CMC"), wherein it was confirmed that Notice had been adequately served and no further Notice was required. The appeals brought by each Applicant were ordered to be heard together. Additionally, Mondelez Canada Inc. was added as a Party in the proceedings.

Status Requests

4Prior to the First CMC, a Participant Status request was received from Marlene Castura, on behalf of Ainslie Wood Community Association ("AWCA"). At the First CMC, it was not clear whether it was Ms. Castura who was seeking status or AWCA, with Ms. Castura as its representative. Ms. Castura undertook to clarify this, and the request was deferred to the second CMC.

5Prior to the Second CMC, it was confirmed that AWCA, an incorporated entity, was seeking status and Ms. Castura was authorized to speak on this entity's behalf. At the Second CMC, the Parties confirmed that they did not oppose AWCA's request for status. The Tribunal determined that AWCA had an interest in the matter and will assist the Tribunal in understanding the potential impacts of the OPA and ZBA on the local community. The Tribunal granted AWCA Participant Status.

Procedural Order and Issues List

6A draft Procedural Order ("PO") and Issues List ("IL") were provided prior to the CMC. These were reviewed at the CMC and the Tribunal provided some directions, mainly pertaining to various timelines by which materials and/or updates are to be provided to the Tribunal. Additionally, issues were included on the IL relating to the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshow, 2019, both of which have now been replaced by the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 ("PPS 2024). The Tribunal inquired as to whether those issues were to remain on the IL. The Parties indicated that there were waiting to see if any transition provisions would be created by the Province before removing those issues.

7The Parties were directed to provide the final and updated PO and IL by October 25, 2025, a month after the CMC, and after the PPS 2024 was scheduled to come into effect on October 20, 2024. This would allow them time to determine which Provincial policy document(s) to include on the IL. The Parties have now provided the final PO and IL, which are approved as attached to this Decision.

Mediation and Settlement

8The Tribunal raised the issue of mediation and settlement discussions. The Parties advised that they were planning to utilize the services of the Tribunal and were waiting for a date for a Tribunal-led mediation assessment. The Parties were directed to advise the Tribunal in writing should they reach a settlement with respect to some or all of the issues prior to the Hearing.

Hearing Details

9Given the number of Parties, potential issues, and potential witnesses, the Tribunal agreed that a twenty-day Merit Hearing would be sufficient. Moreover, due to various conflicts by the Counsel to the Parties, the earliest available date the Parties requested was in January 2026. The Tribunal did attempt to canvas an earlier date but this was the earliest date that all Parties would be available for a twenty-day Hearing.

10A Hearing has been scheduled to take place commencing on Monday, January 12, 2026, at 10 a.m. to and including Monday, February 9, 2026. The Tribunal is not sitting on one of those dates, likely during the last week of January. However, that date is yet to be determined and the Parties will be advised once the date is scheduled.

11On the applicable dates, the Parties are asked to log in to the Video Hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:

GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/687587165

Access Code: 687-587-165

12The Parties and Participant are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting, or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

13Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting Application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll Free): 1-888-299-1889. The access code is as indicated above.

14Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the Hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal's Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

Order

15THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:

a. Ainslie Wood Community Association is a Participant.

b. The Hearing in this matter is scheduled to take place as described above in this Decision.

c. The Procedural Order and Issues List, attached as Schedule A, shall govern this proceeding.

16This Member is not seized but may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should procedural issues arise.

"Bita M. Rajaee"

BITA M. RAJAEE

MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal

Website: www.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.

OLT-24-000232

OLT-24-000234

Schedule A

ONTARIO LAND TRIBUNAL

Tribunal ontarien de l'aménagement du territoire

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 2480545 Ontario Inc. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan- Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit development of three towers 24, 21, and 16 storeys tall, comprising 583 residential units Reference Number: UHOPA-20-027 Property Address: 1629, 1635, 1637 and 1655 Main Street W Municipality/ UT: Hamilton OLT Case No: OLT-24-000232 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-24-000232 OLT Case Name: 2480545 Ontario Inc. v. Hamilton (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: 2480545 Ontario Inc. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law- Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit development of three towers 24, 21, and 16 storeys tall, comprising of three towers 24, 21 and 16 storeys tall, comprising 583 residential units Reference Number: ZAC-20-042 Property Address: 1629, 1635, 1637, and 1655 Main Street W. Municipality/ UT: Hamilton OLT Case No: OLT-24-000233 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-24-000232 OLT Case Name: 2480545 Ontario Inc. v. Hamilton (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan- Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit development of 10-storey student rental residence comprised of 359 units Reference Number: ZAC-23-020/ UGOPA-23-008 Property Address: 17 Ewen Road Municipality/ UT: Hamilton OLT Case No: OLT-24-000234 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-24-000234 OLT Case Name: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp. v. Hamilton (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law- Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit development of 10- storey student rental residence comprised of 359 units Reference Number: ZAC-23-020/ UHOPA-23-008 Property Address: 17 Ewen Road Municipality/ UT: Hamilton OLT Case No: OLT-24-000235 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-24-000234 OLT Case Name: 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp. v. Hamilton (City)

Procedural Order

1. The Tribunal may vary or add to these rules at any time, either on request or as it sees fit. It may alter this Order by an oral ruling, or by another written Order.

2. Further refinement of this Procedural Order is anticipated as the positions of the parties are refined.

Organization of the Hearing

3. The hearing will commence on Monday, January 12, 2026 at 10am and will be conducted virtually. The last scheduled day of the hearing is Monday, February 9, 2026. The Tribunal will not be sitting on one day during the last week of January and that date will be determined later.

4. The length of the hearing will be twenty (20) days.

5. The parties and participants to the hearing are set out in Attachment 1.

6. The current Issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. Except as contemplated in paragraph 2, there will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.

7. The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 3 to this Order. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on consent or by Order of the Tribunal.

8. Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal and the other parties as soon as possible. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative's name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.

Requirements Before the Hearing

9. If the Applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the Applicant shall provide copies of the revised proposal, including all revised plans, drawings, proposed instruments, updated supporting documents and reports which it intends to rely upon, to all the Parties on or before Friday, August 15, 2025. The Applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the parties or which do not seek to scope or resolve concerns expressed in the Witness Statement(s) filed by another party, may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

10. A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses, their professional qualifications, their areas of expertise, completed Acknowledgements of Expert's Duty, the precise area and discipline in which they will seek to be qualified to provide expert testimony, and the intended order in which the witnesses will be called during the hearing. This information must be delivered on or before Friday September 12, 2025. Any challenge by a Party to the qualifications or expertise of a witness must be filed with the Tribunal with supporting reasons within 30 days.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday October 17, 2025 to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Expert meetings and discussions are to be held on a without prejudice and confidential basis, except insofar as it may be necessary for an expert to seek out resources or information (e.g. consult with other experts or counsel) that may be required in order for the expert witness to comply with the duties and obligations outlined in this section. The without prejudice and confidential nature of the discussions includes not being cross-examined or examined, by any party, regarding any statements or positions that may have been made or taken during an expert meeting or discussion. The experts must prepare a list of agreed facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing and provide this list to all of the parties by no later than Friday, October 31, 2025.

12. An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in section 22. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert's testimony. For greater certainty, each expert witness statement must comply with the minimum content requirements specified in Rule 7.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure. If the expert witness has prepared any report(s) that he/she intends to rely on at the hearing, and which did not form part of the submissions made to the City, such report(s) shall be provided to the other parties at the same time as the delivery of expert witness statements, as in section 22.

13. On or before Friday, November 14, 2025, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing or the participant may not give oral evidence at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

14. Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert's evidence, as in section 22. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness' evidence, as in section 15.

15. On or before Friday, November 14, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties.

16. On or before Wednesday, December 10, 2025, the parties shall provide any reply witness statements responding to any written evidence received to the other parties.

17. On or before Friday, December 19, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to the other parties. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

18. A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

19. A party who provides a witness' evidence to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of the record.

20. The parties shall prepare and file a hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Tuesday, December 23, 2025 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.

21. The parties shall cooperate to prepare and file a Joint Document Book with the Tribunal on or before Tuesday, December 23, 2025. If a party wants a printed copy of the electronic Document Book for its own use it shall print it themselves at their own cost. It is not anticipated that the Tribunal will require a printed copy for itself but if it does, the Tribunal will print its own copy.

22. All filings shall be submitted electronically. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7. Documents may be delivered by personal delivery, registered or certified mail or email, or otherwise as the Tribunal may direct. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Tribunal's Rules (Rule 7) on this subject. Material delivered by mail shall be deemed to have been received five business days after the date of registration or certification.

23. On or before Friday, November 28, 2025 the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

24. No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness, and except as contemplated in paragraph 9 of this Order. The Tribunal's Rule 17 applies to such requests.

25. The purpose of the Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in the Procedural Order are set out in Attachment 4.

26. A summary of the various procedural dates is set out in Attachment 5.

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

Attachment 1

List of Parties and Participants

Parties

17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp. and 2480545 Ontario Inc. KAGAN SHASTRI DeMELO WINER PARK LLP 188 Avenue Road Toronto, ON., M5R 2J1 Ira T. Kagan / Sarah R. Kagan Tel: 416-368-2100 x. 226 / 243 ikagan@ksllp.ca / skagan@ksllp.ca

City of Hamilton Legal Counsel, City of Hamilton 71 Main Street West Hamilton, Ontario L8P 4Y5 Patrick MacDonald Tel: 905-546-2424 ext. 4708 patrick.macdonald@hamilton.ca

Mondelez Canada Inc. Wood Bull LLP 65 Queen Street West, Suite 1400 Toronto, ON., M5H 2M5 Kim Mullin / Mithea Murugesu Tel: 416-203-5633 / 416-203-5634 kmullin@woodbull.ca / mmurugesu@woodbull.ca

Participant

Ainslie Wood Community Association Corporation 222 Haddon Avenue South Hamilton, ON., L8S 1Y1 Marlene Castura Tel: 905- 528- 1905 Marlene.castura@gmail.com

Attachment 2

Issues List

1629, 1635, 1637 and 1655 Main Street West (OLT-24-000232)

Issues of the City of Hamilton

Planning

1. Has the proponent satisfactorily demonstrated consistency with Policies 2.1.6, 2.2, 2.4, 2.8.1, 2.8.2, 2.9, 3.5 and 3.6 of the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) ("PPS") with regards to developing housing within the settlement area, new developments adding mitigation measures to address climate change, to promote energy efficiency as part of their development and unit mix sizes for the development, Sewage, Water and Stormwater requirements for the proposed development and minimize potential impacts to the existing employment use within 300 metres of the proposed development?

2. Does the proposed residential intensification demonstrate compliance with Urban Hamilton Official Plan Policies B.2.4.2.2, B.2.4.1.4, B.3.3.1.6 and B.3.3.3.5, C.2.11.1 and C.5.6.1 including but not limited to the compatibility with the surrounding neighbourhood, location of the towers, transition in height and density to adjacent lands, breakdown of units within the multiple dwelling, vehicle access, appropriate amenity space, maintain and enhance the streetscape, impacts to the transportation network, infrastructure capacity, sustainable design principles, tree preservation, enhancing the natural heritage attributes of the site?

3. Does the proposed development meet the Urban Design Policies regarding new built form including but not limited to compatible and enhances the existing character of the neighbourhood, respecting views and vistas of the neighbourhood, animating the street edge, transition between public and private spaces as per Policies B.3.3.1.5, B.3.3.1.8 and B.3.3.2.3 to B.3.3.2.10?

4. Will the proposed development cause undue adverse shadow and wind impacts, respect the existing and planned street proportions, define the street through consistent setbacks and building elevations in accordance with Urban Hamilton Official Plan Policy B.3.3.3.2, B.3.3.3 and B.3.3.4?

5. Do the modifications create any conflicts to either the proposed sensitive land use or the existing industrial use adjacent to the site as per Policy B.3.6.3.18, B.3.6.3.19 and C.3.2.4?

6. Does the proposal conform with the existing built form of adjacent neighbourhoods, minimizing the effects of shadowing in adjacent neighbourhoods, impacts on public view corridors and general public views of the Niagara Escarpment as per Policy E.4.6.24 and E.4.6.29 in Volume 1 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan?

7. Is the proposed intensification meeting the intent of the Urban Corridor Policies in terms of built form as per Policies, E.2.4.10, E.2.4.12 and E.2.4.16?

8. Does the proposed design conform with the Official Plan policy with regards to the maximum building height, density and keeping with the character of the surrounding area as per Policy B.6.2.7.2 a) to g) located in the Ainslie Wood Westdale Secondary Plan in Volume 2 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan?

9. Does the development demonstrate compliance with Policies B.6.2.13.1, B.6.2.13.2 and B.6.2.15.2c) located in the Ainslie Wood Westdale Secondary Plan in Volume 2 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan related to the following:

• Complement and Enhance the existing character of the surrounding environment through the use of appropriate building materials and attention to scale, massing and colour;
• Street Trees along arterial and residential roads;
• Views and Vistas including views of the escarpment; and,
• Provide the required Infrastructure for a range of transportation options.

10. Are the proposed site specific performance standards compatible and in keeping with the intent of the Zoning By-law?

11. Does the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment represent good land use planning and is it in the public interest?

Urban Design

12. Does the proposed residential intensification conform with policy contained in the UHOP:

a. B.2.4.1.4 (b, d, g)

b. B.2.4.2.2 (b, c, d, e, f, g,)

c. B.3.3.3.2 (a, b, c)

d. B.3.3.3.3

e. B.3.3.3.5 (a, c, e)

13. Does the proposed development conform to the policy in the UHOP:

a. E.4.6.8 (b, c, d, e)

b. E.4.6.16

c. E.4.6.24

d. E.4.6.29

14. Does the proposed development follow the Tall Building Guidelines:

a. 3.2 Neighbourhood Transition

b. 3.4 Vibrant Streets

c. 3.6 Views and Landmarks

d. 4.2.1 Building Base Placement

e. 4.2.2 Building Base Height & Scale

f. 4.2.4 Façade Articulation

g. 4.3.1 Tower Floorplate Size & Shape

h. 4.3.1 Placement, Step-backs & Separation

Transportation

15. Are there site plan design issues that could compromise overall site safety?

16. Is the development proposal consistent with Provincial Policy Statement (2024) ("PPS") in terms of Policies 3.2 for transportation systems?

17. Is the development proposal consistent with Provincial Policy Statement (2024) ("PPS") in terms of Policies 3.3 for transportation and infrastructure corridors?

18. Does the proposal manage curbside activities and space allocation to maximize mobility, safety and access as required by the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.1.8)?

19. Does the proposal coordinate and consider the integrated transportation network goals and policies of Section C.4.0 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.2.4)?

20. Does the proposal provide safe, accessible and convenient pedestrian and cycling environments as required by the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.2.12)?

21. Does the proposal conform with the Urban Hamilton Official Plan to assess the impact of proposed developments on current travel patterns and/or future transportation requirements to ensure movement of people and goods, including but not limited to policies C.4.5.12?

22. Does the proposal propose proactive safety measures as required by Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.5.14)?

23. Does the proposal conform with the policies of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (E.3.6.7 d) iii) as the proposed development is premature until such time as an updated Transportation Impact Study has been submitted?

24. Does the proposal conform with the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.5.15) to provide adequate parking for the site while avoiding excess parking supply that can discourage transit use and active transportation choices?

Engineering

25. Does the proposal demonstrate compliance with Policies C.5.3.13, C.5.3.17, C.5.4.3 and C.5.4.5 in regards to Engineering Infrastructure?

26. Is a holding provision appropriate for the proposed development, and if so, what are the appropriate provisions to include?

17 Ewen Road (OLT-24-000234)

Issues of the City of Hamilton

Planning

1. Has the proponent satisfactorily demonstrated consistency with Policies 2.1.6, 2.2, 2.4, 2.8.1, 2.8.2, 2.9, 3.5 and 3.6 of the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) with regards to developing housing within the settlement area, new developments adding mitigation measures to address climate change, to promote energy efficiency as part of their development and unit mix sizes for the development, Sewage, Water and Stormwater requirements for the proposed development and minimize potential impacts to the existing employment use within 300 metres of the proposed development?

2. Does the proposed intensification demonstrate compliance with Urban Hamilton Official Plan Policies B.2.4.2.2, B.2.4.1.4, C.2.11.1 and C.5.6.1 with regards to the height of the podium, location of the towers, vehicle access, infrastructure capacity, sustainable design principles, tree preservation and accommodating appropriate soil depths for tree planting and landscaping in the public realm?

3. Will the proposed development cause undue adverse shadow and wind impacts, respect the existing and planned street proportions, define the street through consistent setbacks and building elevations in accordance with Urban Hamilton Official Plan Policy B.3.3.3.2, B.3.3.3 and B.3.3.4?

4. Do the modifications to the proposed sensitive land use cause any negative impacts to the proposed residential use or the existing industrial use adjacent to the site as per Policy B.3.6.3.18 and B.3.6.3.19?

5. Does the proposal conform with the existing built form of adjacent neighbourhoods, minimizing the effects of shadowing in adjacent neighbourhoods, impacts on public view corridors and general public views fir the Niagara Escarpment as per Policy E.4.6.24 and E.4.6.29 in Volume 1 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan?

6. Does the proposed design conform with the Official Plan policy with regards to the maximum building height, density, student residence use, amenity space and is compatible and does not create a negative effect on the adjacent industrial uses as per Policy B.6.2.17.4 located in the Ainslie Wood Westdale Secondary Plan in Volume 2 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan?

7. Does the development demonstrate compliance with Policies B.6.2.13.1, B.6.2.13.2 and B.6.2.15.2c) located in the Ainslie Wood Westdale Secondary Plan in Volume 2 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan related to the following:

• Complement and Enhance the existing character of the surrounding environment through the use of appropriate building materials and attention to scale, massing and colour;
• Street Trees along arterial and residential roads;
• Views and Vistas including views of the escarpment;
• Create a negative shadow on the Hamilton rail-trail; and,
• Stormwater Management to address future land use changes.

8. Are the proposed site specific performance standards compatible and in keeping with the intent of the Zoning By-law?

9. Does the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment represent good land use planning and is it in the public interest?

Urban Design

10. Does the proposed residential intensification conform with policy contained in the UHOP:

a. B.2.4.1.4 (b, d, g)

b. B.2.4.2.2 (b, c, d, e, f, g,)

c. B.3.3.3.2 (a, b, c)

d. B.3.3.3.3

e. B.3.3.3.5 (a, c, e)

11. Does the proposed development conform to the policy in the UHOP:

a. E.4.6.8 (b, c, d, e)

b. E.4.6.16

c. E.4.6.24

d. E.4.6.29

12. Does the proposed development follow the Tall Building Guidelines:

a. 3.2 Neighbourhood Transition

b. 3.4 Vibrant Streets

c. 3.6 Views and Landmarks

d. 4.2.1 Building Base Placement

e. 4.2.2 Building Base Height & Scale

f. 4.2.4 Façade Articulation

g. 4.3.1 Tower Floorplate Size & Shape

h. 4.3.1 Placement, Step-backs & Separation

Transportation

13. Are there site plan design issues that could compromise overall site safety?

14. Is the development proposal consistent with Provincial Planning Statement (2024) ("PPS") in terms of policies 3.2 for transportation systems?

15. Is the development proposal consistent with Provincial Planning Statement (2024) ("PPS") in terms of policies 3.3 for transportation and infrastructure corridors?

16. Does the proposal manage curbside activities and space allocation to maximize mobility, safety and access as required by the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.1.8)?

17. Does the proposal coordinate and consider the integrated transportation network goals and policies of Section C.4.0 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.2.4)?

18. Does the proposal provide safe, accessible and convenient pedestrian and cycling environments as required by the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.2.12)?

19. Does the proposal conform with the Urban Hamilton Official Plan to assess the impact of proposed developments on current travel patterns and/or future transportation requirements to ensure movement of people and goods, including but not limited to policies C.4.5.12?

20. Does the proposal propose proactive safety measures as required by Urban Hamilton Official Plan (C.4.5.14)?

21. Does the proposal conform with the policies of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (E.3.6.7 d) iii) as the proposed development is premature until such time as an updated Transportation Impact Study has been submitted?

22. Does the proposal conform with the policies of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (E.3.7.6 b) that the new development shall maintain or enhance public access to trails, bikeways and parks adjacent to open spaces?

23. Does the proposal conform with the City of Hamilton Waste Requirements for Design of New Developments and Collection (3.5.3.2) that the loading area does not interfere with pedestrian traffic, vehicular traffic, bike traffic or any public services?

Engineering

24. Does the proposal demonstrate compliance with Policies C.5.3.13, C.5.3.17, C.5.4.3 and C.5.4.5 in regards to Engineering Infrastructure?

25. Is a holding provision appropriate for the proposed development, and if so, what are the appropriate provisions to include?

Issues List for Mondelez Canada Inc.

17 Ewen Road

1. Are the proposed official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment (the "17 Ewen Instruments") consistent with Policies 2.8.1, 2.8.2 and 3.5of the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 in regard to land use compatibility between the existing Mondelez facility and development of sensitive land uses, and protecting the Mondelez facility from incompatible land uses and development?

2. Do the 17 Ewen Instruments conform with the Ainslie Wood Westdale Secondary Plan policies in Volume 2, Chapter B-6 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan in protecting the Mondelez facility from incompatible development as per Policy 6.2.4 (c) and (f) and the urban design policies outlined in Policy 6.2.13?

3. Will the proposed development have adverse impacts on the current and future operations of the Mondelez facility, including any future expansion of the facility?

4. Has an appropriate assessment of the air quality, noise and odour impacts of the Mondelez facility on the proposed development been completed and documented? Will the proposed development result in unacceptable noise, air quality or odour impacts on the proposed sensitive land uses?

5. Has the applicant proposed appropriate mitigation to address any impacts, including to ensure Mondelez Canada's continued compliance with environmental approvals, registrations, legislation and guidelines? If so, have such mitigation measures been adequately secured through the 17 Ewen Instruments or through legally binding agreements with Mondelez Canada?

6. Is the proposed development compatible with the Mondelez facility and does it represent good planning?

1629-1655 Main Street West

1. Are the proposed official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment (the "Main West Instruments") consistent with Policies 2.8.1, 2.8.2 and 3.5of the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 in regard to land use compatibility between the existing Mondelez facility and the development of sensitive land uses, and protecting the Mondelez facility from incompatible land uses and development?

2. Do the Main West Instruments conform with the Ainslie Wood Westdale Secondary Plan policies in Volume 2, Chapter B-6 of the Urban Hamilton Official Plan in protecting the Mondelez facility from incompatible development as per Policy 6.2.4 (c) and (f) and the urban design policies outlined in Policy 6.2.13?

3. Will the proposed development have adverse impacts on the current and future operations of the Mondelez facility, including any future expansion of the facility?

4. Has an appropriate assessment of the air quality, noise and odour impacts of the Mondelez facility on the proposed development been completed and documented? Will the proposed development result in unacceptable noise, air quality or odour impacts on the proposed sensitive land uses?

5. Has the applicant proposed appropriate mitigation to address any impacts, including to ensure Mondelez Canada's continued compliance with environmental approvals, registrations, legislation and guidelines? If so, have such mitigation measures been adequately secured through the Main West Instruments or through legally binding agreements with Mondelez Canada?

6. Is the proposed development compatible with the Mondelez facility and does it represent good planning?

Attachment 3

Order of Evidence

1. 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp. and 2480545 Ontario Inc.

2. City of Hamilton

3. Mondelez Canada Inc.

4. 17 Ewen (Hamilton) Corp and 2480545 Ontario Inc. in reply

Attachment 4

Purpose of the Procedural Order and Meaning of Terms

The Tribunal recommends that the parties meet to discuss this sample Order before the Case Management Conference to try to identify the issues and the process that they want the Tribunal to order following the conference. The Tribunal will hear the parties' comments about the contents of the Order at the conference.

Case Management Conferences usually take place only where the hearing is expected to be long and complicated. If you are not represented by a lawyer, you should prepare by obtaining the Guide to the Ontario Land Tribunal, and the Tribunal's Rules, from the Tribunal Information Office, 15th Floor, 655 Bay Street, Toronto, M5G 1E5, 416-212-6349, or from the Tribunal's website at https://olt.gov.on.ca/about-olt/.

Meaning of terms used in the Procedural Order

A party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Tribunal to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. An unincorporated group cannot be a party and it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person must accept the other responsibilities of a party as set out in the Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorization from the party.

NOTE that a person who wishes to become a party before or at the hearing, and who did not request this at the case management conference (CMC), must ask the Tribunal to permit this.

A participant is an individual or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may make a written submission to the Tribunal. A participant cannot make an oral submission to the Tribunal or present oral evidence (testify in-person) at the hearing (only a party may do so). Section 17 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act states that a person who is not a party to a proceeding may only make a submission to the Tribunal in writing. The Tribunal may direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions from the Tribunal on the content of their written submission, should that be found necessary by the Tribunal. A participant may also be asked questions by the parties should the Tribunal direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions on the content of their written submission.

A participant must be identified and be accorded participant status by the Tribunal at the CMC. A participant will not receive notice of conference calls on procedural issues that may be scheduled prior to the hearing, nor receive notice of mediation. A participant cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision, as a participant does not have the rights of a party to make such requests of the Tribunal.

Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material.

Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing.

A witness statement is a short written outline of the person's background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which he or she will discuss; and a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing.

An expert witness statement should include his or her (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, (3) a list of the issues he or she will address, (4) the witness' opinions on those issues and the complete reasons supporting their opinions and conclusions and (5) a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing. An expert witness statement must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of expert's duty.

A participant statement is a short written outline of the person's or group's background, experience and interest in the matter; a statement of the participant's position on the appeal; a list of the issues which the participant wishes to address and the submissions of the participant on those issues; and a list of reports or materials, if any, which the participant wishes to refer to in their statement.

Additional Information

A summons may compel the appearance of a person before the Tribunal who has not agreed to appear as a witness. A party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons through a request. (See Rule 13 on the summons procedure.) The request should indicate how the witness' evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the information provided in the request that the evidence is relevant, necessary or admissible, the party requesting the summons may provide a further request with more detail or bring a motion in accordance with the Rules.

The order of examination of witnesses is usually direct examination, cross-examination and re-examination in the following way:

• direct examination by the party presenting the witness;
• direct examination by any party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Tribunal;
• cross-examination by parties of opposite interest;
• re-examination by the party presenting the witness; or
• another order of examination mutually agreed among the parties or directed by the Tribunal.

Attachment 5

Summary of Filing Dates

EVENT	DATE
Deadline to file revised plans	Friday August 15, 2025
Parties to exchange their List of Witnesses	Friday September 12, 2025
Deadline for Meeting of Like Experts	Friday October 17, 2025
Deadline to file Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues	Friday October 31, 2025
Parties to exchange their Witness and Expert Witness Statements Participants to provide their Participant Statements	Friday November 14, 2025
Parties to advise the Tribunal if all of the scheduled hearing dates are still required.	Friday November 28, 2025
Parties to exchange their Reply Witness Statements	Wednesday December 10, 2025
Parties to exchange Visual Evidence	Friday December 19, 2025
Parties to File Joint Document Book Parties to File Preliminary Hearing Plan	Tuesday December 23, 2025
Hearing commences	Monday January 12, 2026