HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Downtown & City of Hamilton


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #201  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 4:05 AM
lachlanholmes's Avatar
lachlanholmes lachlanholmes is offline
Forever forward.
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple View Post
Again, I find the application process in Hamilton so confusing. Why does this building go before council, but others don't? Now that it is approved by council, what is the procedure moving forward? When will this start construction?
It's essentially dependent on whether or not a proposal complies with the existing policy (i.e. the Urban Hamilton Official Plan and the relevant Zoning By-law) or not, and, if it does not comply, by how much it doesn't comply.

I'll try and break it into stages:

1) You have a site, and a proposal for it.

2) Does that proposal fully comply with the relevant policy? If no, continue to #3. If yes, skip to #5

3) If the proposal does not comply, by how much is it different?
Example A: Is it substantially different, for instance, proposing a 45 storey residential tower where a low-rise institutional building is envisioned? You will need to amend the relevant zoning by-law, and you probably need to amend the UHOP, as well. Either one of these application types triggers a public process that will bring the proposal before the Planning Committee and ultimately City Council.

Example B: Is it significantly non-compliant in terms of the details regulated by the relevant zoning by-law (exact height , density, parking, etc.), but matches the designation in the UHOP? For instance, a UHOP designation that could allow up to 12 storeys residential, but the zoning only allows for 6 storeys residential? You will need a zoning by-law amendment, but you probably do not require an amendment to the UHOP. However, a zoning by-law amendment alone is enough to trigger a public review process that brings the application before Planning Committee and City Council.

Example C: Does it conform to the UHOP provisions, and does it generally comply with the zoning provisions, but not fully? For instance, are you proposing a 21-metre tall building where the zoning permits an 18 metre tall building, or are you proposing a parking ratio of 0.55 whereas the zoning requires 0.70? You MAY be able to get away with a Minor Variance application, instead of going through a more odious (expensive, time consuming) zoning by-law amendment. Applications for Minor Variances trigger a public process, but it is substantially different than the public process for a zoning by-law amendment or a UHOP amendment.

Instead of going to Planning Committee and City Council for approval, applications for Minor Variance go to the Committee of Adjustment, which is a committee of citizen appointees that decides whether the application meets the statutory test for minor variances. (the test, if you're curious, is that the variance must meet all four of the following: be minor in nature; be desirable for the appropriate development of the land; conform with the general intent of zoning by-law; and conform with the general intent of the official plan) The decisions of the Committee of Adjustment do not go to the Planning Committee or City Council for ratification.
4) For the sake of brevity, I won't go into the minutiae of the processes of what happens within the various applications, as they vary greatly even among the same type of application. Let's move forward to where the actual decision-making happens: when the applications come to the Planning Committee, and subsequently, the City Council, for Examples A and B; and the Committee of Adjustment for Example C.
Examples A and B: The Planning Committee hears the final report from staff on the zoning by-law amendment and/or UHOP amendment. The public can speak at these meetings to the proposals, or submit written comments. The members of the Planning Committee will vote whether or not to approve the amendments. Whatever the Planning Committee decides at this meeting then goes into a report to City Council for ratification. It's usually a rubber-stamp of what happened at the committee meeting, but for more contentious applications like this one, ratification of the items in the report may be considered individually. City Council could, if they disagree with the decision made at the Planning Committee, vote to amend the report to decide differently, and then ratify the amended report. Once the City Council makes a decision, it's final, unless it is appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal.

Example C: The Committee of Adjustment hears the application for Minor Variance, and takes into consideration the staff recommendation whether they support the variances and whether they believe it meets the four tests of a Minor Variance. The public can speak at these meetings or send written correspondence. The members of the Committee of Adjustment must then make their decision on each Minor Variance requested. (it could, for instance, approve the variance to allow 3 metres of extra height, but deny the variance for reduced parking. It can also approve variances with amendments) Once this decision is made by the Committee of Adjustment, it's final, unless it is appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal.
5) Let's assume at this stage, that the development has received all it's necessary approvals at the Zoning/UHOP/Committee of Adjustment level (Examples A and B), or didn't require any to begin with (Example C). It now needs Site Plan Approval, which is a technical approval process not subject to a public review process.

This is important, and is the main reason why so many applications don't go before council: the Downtown Secondary Plan in particular cuts out most need for Zoning By-law and UHOP amendments. Projects may need Minor Variances, but comparatively, those are small potatoes. So, essentially, they go right to the Site Plan Approval stage. (it may need removal of a holding provision, which usually requires the applicant to submit a servicing report to confirm it won't destroy the sewers or a shadow/view study, for the City to confirm that the application complies with the Zoning By-law and UHOP. Like Site Plan Approval, this is a generally technical stage of approval and doesn't really involve the public)

6) Finally, once Site Plan approval is in hand, the applicant can move forward to the building permits stage, which is the most technical stage and has no public involvement, basically checking that all of the plans meet the building code and comply to the Zoning, UHOP, and approved Site Plan. Once these permits start rolling in (they are split into various types), the approved phase of work can commence.




I've skipped over a lot of the fine details in this, a big one is I haven't really covered how the Ontario Land Tribunal fits into this (essentially: it can go there multiple ways, for a multitude of reasons, by a multitude of people, and it's very difficult to condense into a neat timeline), but I have tried to highlight how and why some projects have a public process, and why others don't, and I hope it makes it a bit easier to understand.

The absolute TL;DR is:

Zoning and/or UHOP amendment needed = Public process via Planning Committee and City Council
Minor Variance needed = Public process via Committee of Adjustment
Neither needed = No public process, straight to Site Plan Approval (+ potentially holding provision removal)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #202  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 1:04 PM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple View Post
LMAO love it
I have nothing against Kroetsch, as sometimes a loud voice can be a benefit. I just hope he's being consistent and applying the same standards to different issues in the same ways - otherwise the benefit of a loud voice is lost.

And I too think he's grandstanding, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now that he's trying to establish himself as a politician, and it will be a learning process with mistakes and wins and losses. But "for now" will be a relatively short span of time for me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #203  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 1:22 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 11,486
in this case I think it's pretty clear Kroetsch had to play politician and vote against this as his constituents in the neighbourhood were diametrically opposed to it.

Kroetsch's problem is that he holds himself as "not a politician" and one "led by evidence based decision making" - and that's where voting against this breaks down. He had to play politician and represent his constituents here - fine. But call it like it is, and don't try to come up with some wierd rationale as to why you are voting that way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #204  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 2:48 PM
TheRitsman TheRitsman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
in this case I think it's pretty clear Kroetsch had to play politician and vote against this as his constituents in the neighbourhood were diametrically opposed to it.

Kroetsch's problem is that he holds himself as "not a politician" and one "led by evidence based decision making" - and that's where voting against this breaks down. He had to play politician and represent his constituents here - fine. But call it like it is, and don't try to come up with some wierd rationale as to why you are voting that way.
I think that's a fair criticism, but politicians only have so much political capital, and once it's used up it's pretty much unrecoverable. Cllr. Kroetsch is in his first year of 4, and if he hopes to win another 4 years and implement the things he thinks are important (many of which I agree with), then he will need to maintain some of that capital. I expected him to vote against this development, with the knowledge it would pass anyway.

Going back over to the VHT, I think it's similar, where I suspect many who voted against are actually in support, but don't want to use up political capital for no reason when it's basically guaranteed to pass.
__________________
Hamilton Downtown. Huge tabletop skyline fan. Typically viewing the city from the street, not a helicopter. Cycling, transit and active transportation advocate 🚲🚍🚋

Follow me on Twitter: https://x.com/ham_bicycleguy?t=T_fx3...SIZNGfD4A&s=09
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #205  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 4:37 PM
drpgq drpgq is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hamilton/Dresden
Posts: 1,808
Thanks for the summary!


It's essentially dependent on whether or not a proposal complies with the existing policy (i.e. the Urban Hamilton Official Plan and the relevant Zoning By-law) or not, and, if it does not comply, by how much it doesn't comply.

I'll try and break it into stages:

1) You have a site, and a proposal for it.

2) Does that proposal fully comply with the relevant policy? If no, continue to #3. If yes, skip to #5

3) If the proposal does not comply, by how much is it different?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #206  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 6:56 PM
zeroday zeroday is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 6
As a far left ideologue, Kroetsch has made a conscious decision to represent only a small portion of his ward...if you're homeless, suffer from addiction, lgbtq...etc, then Kroetsch will work hard to get these issues brought to the forefront of every policy decision. As for everyone else in his constituency, he couldn't care less about you...Your property taxes are meant to go towards servicing the needy. Many people have buyers remorse voting for him. He doesn't even have the sense to realize that the property taxes from this tower can go towards addressing the social issues in Hamilton. The amount of virtue signalling this dude does from his Twitter account...unbelievable

Last edited by zeroday; Nov 23, 2023 at 7:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #207  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 7:05 PM
TheHonestMaple's Avatar
TheHonestMaple TheHonestMaple is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,717
Yeah it's absolutely wild. Listening to him pontificate during council meetings is nauseating. I wish we had a mechanism to recall elected officials like they do in the US. This guy is trouble.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #208  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2023, 9:08 PM
ShavedParmesanCheese's Avatar
ShavedParmesanCheese ShavedParmesanCheese is offline
It's a nickname from work
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Ontario
Posts: 358
Such are the potholes in improving a political system. I suspect those who regret voting for him are nevertheless happy the old councilor is out. Hopefully we can say the same next election.
__________________
I really, really like trains.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #209  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2023, 12:19 AM
atnor atnor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 396
Not to mention the spin off effect of having a 45 story tower downtown will have on local and surrounding businesses.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Downtown & City of Hamilton
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.