Re: Proposed Minsters…

Re: Proposed Minsters Zoning Order
Jamesville Redevelopment Plan
Hamilton, Ontario

From: North End Neighbourhood Association (NENA)

For Consideration,

The North End Neighbourhood Association (NENA) has been an active voice in the community for more than 25 years, with a strong outreach to the community through public meetings the community paper and social media.

Our association does not oppose development but wants to ensure that any proposed development follows accepted planning guidelines (Setting Sails) and earlier discussion with developers. To ensure the character of our neighborhood being houses and low rise residential is maintained. Members of our association had previous meetings with the developer (2022) where a plan was agreed to that consisted of townhouse with low rise residential – see attached. The current plan does not reflect what was agreed to, the character of the community and provides no information about the design and how it connects to the local area.

NENA has spent a lot of time recently working with the City and Councilor looking at traffic management to create safer people friendly streets and welcomed other developments where planning guidelines and public City procedures are followed.

NENA’s position through public meetings / discussions:

1. The Minister reject the current plan for high rise development and increased density as there was no open public input or discussion

2. The Minister use the zoning order to approval the original plan (2022) coordinated with public input between the community and Developer.

3. NENA continues to support appropriate redevelopment of Jamesville in a timely manner following existing planning guidelines.

4. The original plan (2022) was previously approved by City Council and our association did not appeal as it was appropriate for the neighborhood.

5. NENA is a family community and we want a development with green space, areas for children / families and street level commercial where people can engage with each other

Planning Policies & Process:

1. Approving the City’s request for a Minister’s Zoning Order (MZO) replaces Council’s existing approved plan of a four-city block project in our neighborhood, that followed conventional open to the public planning process with a known Developer proposal. The Developer’s new proposal is significantly different from the accepted plan and was negotiated by the City and Developer through a closed process.

2. The Developer’s proposal is a radical change from the Council approved plan and a change equivalent to an Official Plan Amendment.

3. NENA asks that the Developer’s proposal be rejected for an MZO and that the original Council Approved Plan be approved for an MZO.

4. NENA asks that any significant changes in the Council Approved Plan should be considered through a public process. Understanding that all consideration of the Developer’s current proposal for a Minister’s Zoning Order have been conducted in private.

5. Alternatively, the Developer's current proposal should be sent back to the City to engage in a public planning process consistent with the level of change the Developer's proposal will produce.

NENA & Project Background:

1. NENA has been deeply and positively involved in the planning process for our neighbourhood since the last century, spearheaded by people who live in and know the community. NENA has worked with the City to create development and planning guidelines for Hamilton's waterfront as an additional 1600 new homes are currently proposed at one of our Piers. When a project meets approved planning policies and there is open discussion with the public we have supported projects.

2. NENA has also developed a team focusing on traffic management strategies for our neighbourhood that has substantially reduced speeds and accidents on our residential streets. We helped identify the long term character of our neighbourhood as a Child and Family Friendly Neighbourhood where people want to be.

3. The result has been a stable neighbourhood that welcomes families with children in a downtown setting, with new construction and extensive renovation following the approval of our work.

4. When the Jamesville redevelopment project was awarded to the Developer by the City, NENA were invited by the Developer to review any possible obstacles as the project was designed and moved forward. NENA was clear that we would support a project that complied with the approved planning policies for our neighbourhood.

5. NENA held a series of meetings with the Developer to understand the project. There was also a team of volunteer residents who studied the project and provided feedback to the association as we do with any project. Once that review was complete a public meeting was held and NENA reached an agreement with the Developer on a plan for the entire area proposed for redevelopment that provided new homes and two six storey buildings of affordable housing. Our neighbourhood has numerous existing affordable and social housing projects and they are welcome.

6. Once that agreement was reached the proposal then went to City Hall, where NENA recommended the plan to the City.

7. On this project the City is both the owner of the property and the development approval agency. The planning process became confidential when the application went to City Hall and all discussions with NENA stopped. At the end of this secretive process a new plan was approved by Council for released, which deviated from the plan NENA and the Developer had agreed on. When the plan went back to council NENA raised several aspects of the plan for non-compliance with City’s own policies but the revised plan was still approved.

8. The current plan as part of the MZO was appealed by the Canadian National Railway (CNR), based upon concerns for future residences without reference to existing residence.

9. When settlement negotiations began, City staff excluded the local councilor and the public from any role in discussion or providing feedback during settlement negotiations.

10. On April 16, 2024, Council voted to approve what the local councilor calls "the Developer's proposal". There was no input from any public group or individual to this radically different proposal. The Developer's proposal as filed has no details of any aspect of the plan other than site layout and building heights. The "Developer's proposal" is a radical change from the previously approved plan with density changing from 300 units to 600 units. More importantly many features that we agreed on have been changed as noted below.

11. None of the conventional questions of a new development have been discussed publicly. For example we cannot determine the number of parking spaces, how much or what parts of the underground parking has been given away by the City. There is no indication of any visitor parking for the town homes forcing traffic into neighbouring streets to park that are already being used. The buildings appear to have blank walls facing the rail yards, the functionality of that design has not been discussed. There are numerous impacts the neighbourhood that have not been discussed or coordinated, such as the breakdown between rental, family and market housing.

12. The Developer’s proposal if approved through the MZO would be the equivalent of an Official Plan Amendment, leading with certainty to new height limits along James Street from Strachan to Burlington Street. Without study a MZO should not be used to allow Developer’s to evade an OPA. The Developer’s proposal will radically alter the character of the neighbourhood and reverse twenty years of progress in building a child and family friendly neighbourhood in the middle of a large city. Cities around the world are looking for ways to have families with children live in the urban core, we have solved that problem for Hamilton. The Developer's high buildings proposal will undermine all the progress that has been made on making our neighbourhood a warm child and family friendly neighbourhood.

13. No planning rationale has been given for the change in building heights from 6 stories to 12 and 20 stories. The City has a specified high-rise height density area in the city centre that starts a block away from the project site. There is no demonstrated need for the increased density.

14. Hamilton has many areas approved for increased density. There is no need for the additional density beyond what has already been agreed to. NENA is concerned that the increased density and removal of underground parking is a reflection of financial aspects associated with the transaction between the Developer and the City rather than sound planning principles.

15. Hamilton and other municipalities is in need of public and supportive housing that the increase in building height provides in two buildings. The focus of this MZO is the market rate housing first, pushing housing for those who need it most back years and possibly creating conflicts with early purchasers.

16. NENA’s agreement with the Developer included a provision that Simcoe Street would not run through the project from James Street to Bay Street. For the perspective of future residents and safety not being a through street removes the temptation of using the development as an alternate route to get through the City and through school zones.

17. The Developer's Proposal should not be approved without reasonable public consideration of the details normally considered for an OPA and Zoning By-law amendment in the middle of a City. No semblance of a planning process was undertaken before Council approved the Developer’s Proposal and Council voted for a plan on one sheet of paper without having any idea or understanding of what the built project would be and how it would function as a part of the neighbourhood.
18. NENA has supported growth of private housing along with public and social housing in our neighbourhood. The sites proximity to a nearby GO Station is understood and NENA does not opposed increased density, provided proper planning policies and guidelines are followed. Having previously supported projects that are consistent with the vision for the neighbourhood and approved City policies. In this instance there is no planning rationale for doubling of density of the site particularly when so many details are unknown.

19. Council approved of the original plan (2022) meets all the tests of sound planning and should be implemented as quickly as possible through this MZO application. MZO.

Conclusion:

NENA is a strong and consistent voice in our neighborhood to ensure proper planning and design policies are followed. To maintain the character of our family friendly community that attracts people and keeps people local. We are not opposed to development but want a wholistic approach taken to fully understand and review how traffic, building design, public space and community connections are made. Unfortunately, with the revised design before you there are too many unknows and there has been no proper public engagement or discussion for approval of this application.