Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 13, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001169
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Valery (Chedoke Browlands) Developments Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of City of Hamilton to adopt the requested amendment
Existing Designation: Neighbourhoods and Open Space
Proposed Designated: Neighbourhoods and Open Space
Purpose: To permit the development of 630 residential units while retaining the Long & Bisby Building
Property Address/Description: 801, 820, 828, 855, 865, and 870 Scenic Drive
Municipality: City of Hamilton
Municipality File No.: UHOPA-20-026
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001169
OLT File No.: OLT-21-001169
OLT Case Name: Valery (Chedoke Browlands) Developments 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: Valery (Chedoke Browlands) Developments Inc.
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 6593 - Refusal or neglect of City of Hamilton to make a decision
Existing Zoning: Low Density Multiple Dwellings
Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (To be determined)
Purpose: To permit the development of 630 residential units while retaining the Long & Bisby Building
Property Address/Description: 801, 820, 828, 855, 865, and 870 Scenic Drive
Municipality: City of Hamilton
Municipality File No.: ZAC-20-041
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001169
OLT File No.: OLT-21-001170
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Valery (Chedoke Browlands) Developments Inc.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of City of Hamilton to make a decision
Purpose: To permit the development of 630 residential units while retaining the Long & Bisby Building
Property Address/Description: 801, 820, 828, 855, 865 and 870 Scenic Drive
Municipality: City of Hamilton
Municipality File No.: 25T-202008
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001169
OLT File No.: OLT-21-001171
Heard: May 27, 2024, by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Valery (Chedoke Browlands) Developments Inc.
R. Cheeseman S. Fleming
City of Hamilton
P. Krysiak
Niagara Escarpment Commission
K. Hare A. Landre
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY P. TOMILIN ON MAY 27, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This was a Hearing in the matter of the appeal by Valery (Chedoke Browlands) Developments Inc. (“Appellant”) arising from a non-decision concerning an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”), Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications to permit the development of 630 residential units and the adaptive reuse of the Long and Bisby building for commercial uses at 801, 820, 828, 855, 865, 870 Scenic Drive, and 828 Sanatorium Road (“subject property” / “site”), in the City of Hamilton (“City”).
2Prior to the Hearing, the Parties advised the Tribunal that they had resolved their issues.
3Matt Johnston, a Registered Professional Planner, provided a Sworn Affidavit (Exhibit 1) and was qualified by the Tribunal to provide land use planning opinion evidence in relation to the matter under appeal. Mr. Johnston delivered a detailed contextual and land-use planning rationale in support of the settlement.
SITE LOCATION AND SURROUNDINGS
4The site is bound by Scenic Drive to the south and the Niagara Escarpment brow to the north and separated by a 30 metre (“m”) development buffer measured from the 2009 staked limit of the brow edge. Below the escarpment is the Chedoke Civic Golf Club. To the east and west of the subject property, there are single detached dwellings fronting onto Scenic Drive.
5The subject property is approximately 9.425 hectares (“ha”) in area and is predominantly vacant, other than the existing Long & Bisby Building located at 828 Sanatorium Road, which is proposed to be retained and restored in accordance with the terms and conditions established through the approval of Heritage Permit HP2023-045 on October 4, 2023.
6The site is comprised of two development blocks – the East Block and the West Block. These Blocks are separated by an existing creek channel, which is proposed to be restored and realigned as a part of the future development.
7Adjacent to the East Block, there is a 3.02 ha Woodlot. The Woodlot will be separated from the proposed development area by a 10 m wide Vegetation Protection Zone (VPZ), as well as an additional 10 m wide Tree Replanting Vegetation Protection Zone located at the south-easterly limit of the Block.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
8The development proposal is comprised of two five-storey buildings containing 231 dwelling units, 35 townhouse dwelling units within the West Block, and four multi-storey (eight-storeys, six-storeys, five-storeys, and five-storeys) dwellings containing a combined total of 370 units within the East Block. A total of 1,087 parking spaces will be offered across both Blocks, with the majority being located underground. The existing Long & Bisby Building, located at 828 Sanatorium Road, will be retained and restored.
PLANNING RATIONALE
9The planning policy documents related to the proposed development are s. 2 of the Planning Act (“Act”), the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”), the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (“GP”), the Niagara Escarpment Plan (“NEP”), the Urban Hamilton Official Plan (“UHOP”), and the Chedmac Secondary Plan.
10It is Mr. Johnston’s opinion that the proposed development is consistent with sections 1.1.1, 1.1.3.1 to 1.1.3.4, 1.2.1, 1.4.1, 1.4.3, 1.5 to 1.8, 2.1, 2.2.2, and 2.6 of the PPS, by developing healthy, livable and safe communities, by maximizing the available supply of land for residential use and optimizing the parcel from a servicing and transportation impact perspective; promoting biodiversity through the dedication of a 3.02 ha Woodlot/Environmentally Significant Area Block (Block 6) and a 1.17 ha Open Space Block (Block 4) to the City.
11Mr. Johnston proffered that the development proposal conforms to or does not conflict with the applicable sections of the GP, specifically, with s. 2.2.1, 2.2.6, 3.1 and 4.1, by preparing for the projected population growth; introduction of a range of dwelling types and sizes within an established area, and by contributing to the achievement of a complete community within the area.
12Mr. Johnston explained that the subject property is designated ‘Urban Area’ and ‘Escarpment Natural Area’ by the NEP. He noted that the strict regulation of the height, massing, and location of all proposed buildings and structures on site were developed in consultation with Niagara Escarpment Commission staff and will ensure the preservation of scenic resources and culturally significant views.
13Mr. Johnston provided that the subject property is designated ‘Neighbourhoods’ and ‘Open Space’ on Schedule E-1 of the UHOP. In his professional planning opinion, the development proposal aids the City in achieving its goal of accommodating 30% of all residential intensification within the Neighbourhoods designation. It also represents an appropriate form of intensification within an existing built-up area, respecting existing natural features and cultural heritage landscapes.
14Mr. Johnston stated that the site is currently designated ‘Medium Density Residential 3’ and ‘Natural Open Space’ and is located within Special Policy Area – B of the Chedmac Secondary Plan. He noted that the proposed OPA proposes to maintain these designations while modifying their boundaries. It is his opinion, that the development proposal meets the intent and objectives of the Chedmac Secondary Plan.
BILL 150
15Mr. Johnston notes that Bill 150 (and the corresponding removal of Provincial modifications made to OPA 167) has no implications on the proposed development.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
16The Tribunal accepts the uncontroverted professional opinion of Mr. Johnston and finds that the proposed OPA, Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision represent good planning, are consistent with and/or conforms to the higher-level policy documents, including the PPS, the GP, the NEP, the UHOP, the Chedmac Secondary Plan, and s. 51(24), and 51(25) of the Act.
ORDER
17THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeals are allowed, in part, and the Official Plan for the City of Hamilton is amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order and as modified is approved;
18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeals are allowed, in part, and the Tribunal directs the City of Hamilton to amend By-law No. 6593 and By-law No. 05-200 as set out in Attachment 2 to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk of the City of Hamilton to assign a number to this by-law for record-keeping purposes;
19THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeals are allowed, in part, and the draft plan shown on the plan prepared by Urban Solutions dated 2023-11-22 comprising "The Browlands", as set out in Attachment 3, is approved subject to the fulfillment of the conditions set out in Attachment 4 to this Order;
20AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT pursuant to subsection 51(56.1) of the Planning Act, the City of Hamilton shall have the authority to clear the conditions of draft plan approval and to administer final approval of the plan of subdivision for the purposes of subsection 51(58) of the Act. In the event that there are any difficulties implementing any of the conditions of draft plan approval, or if any changes are required to be made to the draft plan, the Tribunal may be spoken to.
“P. Tomilin”
p. tomilin
MEMBER
Ontario Land Tribunal
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
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 4