Sound check. 1 2 3 Good morning. This is the planning committee, a special planning committee on Tuesday, August 25th, 2026. It's now 9:30 a.m. It's good morning. As we have quorum present, I'd like to call this meeting of the planning committee to order. Our quorum consists of councelor Wilson, councelor Casar, councelor A. Wilson, councelor Clark, councelor Paul's, councelor McMaken, and myself. And online we have councelor Francis, councelor Wayne, and councelor Kretch. Just reminder for everyone to switch your electronic devices to a nonaudible function during the committee meetings. We're moving to the approval of the agenda. May I please have a mover and second to approve the agenda as presented? And do we have any speakers about that? Councelor Clark, we're going to recognize you as a non-itting member of the committee. >> Uh, thank you, Chair, and and I acknowledge that I do not sit on on this committee. Um, Alfreda is the largest piece of property um that is a part of the secondary plan um as well as the decision of the government recently on the OOLT. I'd like to ask that the committee consider the inc camera portion of the meeting before we deal with the private secondary plan for Alida. I'd like the benefit of that advice myself before I make comments on the secondary plan. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. So, I'm just going to recognize councelor Nan is here as well. Um, are there any members of the committee that want to move that? >> You don't need to move it. Oh, okay. So, it's just a plan. Okay. Thank you. So, that's what we'll do then. Going to move to close session after the delegation. >> After the delegations at 4.1. Yes. >> Okay. Are there any more amendments to the agenda from committee members? Not seeing any clerk. >> Through you, Mr. Chair. Uh Mr. Chair, we do have uh one delegate who has withdrawn their delegation. Item 4.1C2. Ian Borsick from Environment can environment Hamilton is not able to be with us today. >> Okay, thank you for that. So, at this point, we're going to uh vote with a show of hands. All in favor of the agenda and >> secondary to approve the agenda. >> Oh, sorry. Councelor Wilson, councelor Casar, you okay? >> Moved by councelor Wilson and Councelor Moren Wilson and councelor Casar. >> Okay. A show of hands now, please. That passes. The motion's carried. We're going to declarations of interest. Are there any declarations of interest from any members of the committee? Seeing none, let's move on. This is our public hearing. The public has been advised of how to pre-register to be a delegate at the public meetings on today's agenda. If a specified person or public body would otherwise have an ability to appeal the decision of the council, city of Hamilton to the Ontario Land Tribunal, but the specified person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the city of Hamilton before the bylaw is passed, the specified person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision. If a specified person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the city of Hamilton before the bylaw is passed, the specified person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Land Tribunal unless in the opinion of the tribunal there are reasonable grounds to do so. So where the 4.1 peed 26152 private secondary plan for the Alfrid expansion lands in W 9 and 11. >> Does the committee wish to hear the staff presentation? >> Yes. Okay. So Mr. Hayworth submission to the city of Hamilton before the bylaw was the 4.5 personal. >> Just a few bugs were working out being in this room. Okay, we'll go to uh councelor Clark. He has a question before we have any presentations and we may uh alter the agenda. >> So my I understand that it's a presentation, but my request was that we would get legal advice before we proceeded with these items. >> I'm fine with that. I I was understanding that it was going to be after delegations before, but this is what you were requesting. That's my misunderstanding. So are you suggesting that we move to close session at this moment right now before delegations or do we have delegations and then >> I guess I was unaware that in your process on the planning committee delegations included staff for the city. So that's my fault. But my intention, my request was that I wanted to hear from legal advice before we had consideration of anything. And we will be hearing this without hearing legal advice prior to it. So that was my request. I'll leave it to the committee. >> Okay. So I'm at the I'm at the uh will of committee. Councelor Marine Wilson. Thank you uh through the chair. Just looking for some procedural advice. I understood the guest member requesting that we do entertain or host and hear from delegates go to closed and then back into open so that we can u probably hear and think about that presentation uh through the through the ears of what we've heard and closed. That was my understanding. if I could have a ruling on on the order. Thank you. >> Okay. So, here's what I'm hearing right now. Delegates first, close session, then presentation. Is that is that what we're uh coming to consensus about? Councelor A. Wilson. >> When we have a public hearing, typically we do the staff presentation first so that delegates know what they're delegating on. They've been introduced to the subject. The staff presentation is meant to be the introduction for everyone, the base setting point. So sometimes we skip it because it is meant to be an introduction. Um, if we want to skip it today, that's always an option. If we want to rearrange it, that's always an option. But I don't understand why we can't just have the presentation, hear from delegates, not make any decisions, continue to get more information, and just get information collectively throughout the morning. And it doesn't matter to me what order we do it in, but my understanding is we typically do it this way so that everyone's working with the same 101 at the beginning. Thank you. >> Okay. And I and I acknowledge that that was what my intention was in the first place. Um, councelor Clark, I just wanted to uh share with you that that's probably what I'm going to move with right now and go with the presentation. Then we're going to go with the delegates. Then we'll go with that. Okay. So the introduction uh presentation from Mr. Hayworth, you may proceed. Thank you. >> Great. I'll just wait for it to get pulled up. >> Okay. >> Great. Thank you. Hello, chair, uh, committee members, members of the public, and staff. I'm Dave Hayworth. I'm the director and senior adviser of strategic growth initiatives for the city of Hamilton. We are here today to discuss the Alfreda secondary plan, a privately initiated secondary plan on the Alfrida expansion lands. Next slide. Before we get into the proposed Alrighty plan, here is a brief update on the urban boundary expansion applications and Ontario land tribunal hearings. On August 17th, the Ontario Land Tribunal released a decision on the phase one hearing relating to Hamilton's land needs. The Ontario Land Tribunal in their decision stated finds that there is a need to implement an expansion of the city's urban boundary of at least 1,600 gross developable actors. Phase two of the urban boundary expansion appeals will determine separately if each 20 road west, White Church and Alfreda are appropriate additions to the urban boundary. So the phase one set the amount of land supply to come into the urban boundary. Phase two determines the locationational aspects of where that expansion should occur. As an update, the 20 Road West hearing uh was adjourned in May and we are waiting for a return date. The White Church urban boundary expansion hearing starts October 1st, 2026 and Alfreda UB hearing uh starts uh in January 2027. Next slide. The applicant is seeking to establish a secondary plan on approximately 1,226 hectares of land through this proposed official plan amendment application. The Alfrida Secondary Plan is bounded by Second Road east and Hendershot Road to the east, Golf Club Road to the south, Trinity Road to the southwest, an East West Hydro Corridor to the northwest, Swayazy Road, and Upper Centennial Parkway to the northwest, and Mud Street to the north. The proposed use for the site includes a mixture of residential, commercial, and other uses. The applicant estimates the area will accommodate approximately 65,000 people and approximately 6,000 jobs for an approximate density of 71.7 persons and jobs per hectare. >> Next slide. >> As a brief overview of the application, the Alfreda secondary plan application was submitted by the Alfreda Community Builders Group, Inc. which consists of many of the land owners within the subject lands. The image on this SL slide indicates the participating and cooperating land owners within the subject lands. These land owners lands are shaded in pink. This secondary plan would establish the long-term land use framework for the community including the plan location of housing, employment areas, parks, transportation, infrastructure, and community services. The application also proposes policies to guide future development and protect natural heritage features. Next slide. The Alfredo lands have been the subject of several planning processes over the years. To position this application, I'd like to briefly share some re some recent background context. A previous urban boundary expansion application was submitted to the city and was denied by council in 2025. While related, the previous urban boundary expansion application and this secondary application serve different purposes. An urban boundary expansion application considers whether land should be included within Hamilton's urban area. The secondary plan application establishes a vision and planning framework for how lands could develop if urban development is permitted. As shown on the screen, a UB application for the Alfredo lands was processed in 2024 2025. To recap, in November 2024, the city of Hamilton received an official plan amendment to expand the urban boundary for lands in Orada. Staff hosted open houses while reviewing the application with a statutory public meeting in June 2025. The application was denied by city council in June 2025. The applicant then appealed council decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal. While the urban bounty expansion application is currently under appeal and before the Ontario land tribunal, the planning act allows the applicant to submit an official plan amendment to establish a secondary plan for the Alfrida lands. A secondary plan is a land use plan for a particular geographic region area of a municipality that is prepared as an amendment to an official plan. Secondary plans are in a sense a blueprint for how a community will grow. While secondary plans are often city-led, they can also be privately initiated. Secondary plans identify more detailed land uses, densities, infrastructure requirements, design requirements, and other implementing actions appropriate for a community. On April 30th, 2026, the applicants submitted the the Alfrida secondary plan official plan amendment application. In May, the city deemed the privately initiated secondary plan application for the Alfrida lands complete for processing. It should be noted staff have not been successful defending incomplete applications based on content only. The content will however be a major role in the recommendation of staff. City staff hosted a series of three open houses in June 2026 to share the applicant submitted materials and receive feedback from the public. Following the statutory public meeting, council will make a decision on the privately initiated secondary plan application. If a decision is not reached within the legislated 120day time frame or if the applicant disagrees with the outcome, the matter may be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal. Next slide. On screen is the applicant's proposed land use plan. The proposed secondary plan includes a variety of land use designations that establish and outline what uses are permitted and where those uses are envisioned. The secondary plan provides for the full hierarchy of parks including two community parks, 11 neighborhood parks and public squares planned for for the community nodes. The proposed alpha secondary plan contemplates five Catholic elementary schools and one Catholic secondary school and seven public elementary schools and one public secondary school. In the planning justification report, the applicant notes that the Alfrida secondary plan seeks to establish a planning framework that will facilitate the eventual buildout of a healthy, safe, comfortable, accessible community in Alfreda. Staff acknowledged that the applicant has attempted to plan at a high level a complete community inclusive of a of mixed use designations and areas of higher density. However, there are multiple issues with the proposed secondary plan which will be highlighted later on in this presentation. Next slide. The applicant submitted 13 technical studies planning justification report, a draft urban Hamilton official plan amendment, a draft rural Hamilton official plan amendment in support of the application. The submitted materials were circulated to internal city departments, external agencies, and indigenous communities for review and comment. The commercial needs assessment, energy and environ environmental assessment and financial impact analysis and financial strategy and land use compatibility, air quality and odor impact study were peer-reviewed. The documents were made publicly available on the city's website and summaries were presented at the open houses. Next slide. City staff have engaged with the public through several efforts and have collected, included, and summarized the public's questions, comments, and concerns in the staff report. To engage the public and share information regarding this application, staff asked the applicant to increase the amount of signage placed on the subject property and mailed out information about the application to all properties within 400 meters of the subject lands. In keeping with what was done for the related urban boundary expansion application, staff also sent out emails to the urban boundary notification list, posted on social media, and created a special project inbox and notification list so people could be kept up to date. Written comments could be submitted through the project inbox. From May 13 to June 26, staff received and responded to 78 written emails and comments, questions, and concerns from the public. Further staff hosted two virtual open houses June 11th and June 25th and one inerson openhouse June 17th where information regarding the application was presented. A total of 111 participants attended the three open houses. Members of the public were invited to present their questions, comments, and concerns. 61 people attended the in-house openhouse. The virtual open houses had more limited turnout, but in person, the in-person openhouse was well attended. Next slide. Through the public engagement process, staff have identified the most common themes. The top areas of concern articulated by members of the public were regarding farmland, natural heritage, wildlife ecology. 47 comments urban boundary expansion and green field development. 47 comments infrastructure capacity and municipal servicing. 28 comments fiscally responsible growth management. 28 comments. The top areas of support identified by members of the public were regarding housing choice and diversified housing options. Two comments market competition to lower housing costs. comment the inevitable need for growth. Comment and inter regional traffic and transportation impacts. Comment next slide. Staff's review indicates that the proposed secondary plan is not adequately demonstrated several um key key uh concerns. Infrastructure capacity. There is insufficient evidence provided in the application that the existing or planned water and wastewater infrastructure has enough capacity to service the proposed secondary plan area. The submitted materials are insufficient and do not provide a reasonable understanding of the impacts of the proposed development on the existing or planned storm water system. Comments made previously on the urban boundary expansion application have not been addressed to staff satisfaction. Transportation capacity. The applicant has not demonstrated that there is existing or planned capacity in the broader community transportation system upstream and downstream to accommodate the anticipated traffic. The assessment submitted did not provide information on how the development of the Friday lands would align with the city's population and employment forecasts, the city of Hamilton transportation master plan and strategic transportation network review. Phasing plan. The applicant has incorporated some phasing policies within the draft urban Hamilton official plan submitted to the city. While staff appreciate the inclusion of the phasing policies, the policies proposed are vague. More detailed phasing policies are necessary to ensure that any development of the Alfrida lands will occur in an orderly manner. Crucially, that the extension of required infrastructure necessary to support development is feasible and financially viable. Staff recommend that the draft official plan policies be enhanced and staff's comments on phasing with respect to both the draft policies and supportive studies be addressed and that a master phasing strategy be submitted to the city for review and approval. Natural heritage system protection and enhancement. The applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated the protection and enhancement of the natural heritage system from the potential impacts of the development. The draft policies do not adequately consider the protection and enhancement of biodiversity and ecological function. The proposed policies do not adopt a design with nature approach and lack details on the restoration enhancement of connections, quality and amount of natural habitat which ultimately connects with the ability to maintain and enhance contributions made by the natural heritage system quality of life for residents. The two conservation authorities expressed concerns that the drought policies would permit minor infrastructure works or flood plane works to be located within the flood fringe and there is insufficient evidence that the proposed development is directed away from hazardous lands and potential impacts to natural hazards are minimized. Compatible and aligned designations through the urban Hamilton official plan amendment. The applicant has proposed multiple modifications to the standardized residential and mixeduse designations. Staff have concerns with the proposed designation alterations relating to density, land use, building heights, designation overlay strategies, land use compatibility, and the removal of design related policies. These concerns are further outlined in detail in the in the staff report. Next slide. the recommendations of the staff report um that the rural and urban Hamilton official plan amendments submitted on behalf of the Alfreda community builders group for the land shown in appendix A to establish the Alfrida secondary plan on the subject lands to the Alfreda urban boundary expansion lands be denied on the following basis. This secondary plan would apply to urban expansion lands that are presently subject to an Ontario land tribunal appeal based on a council denial of the expansion lands. The proposed secondary plan contains significant deficiencies in both the supporting technical studies and the proposed official plan amendment policies relating to water, wastewater and storm water infrastructure, natural heritage protection, land use compatibility, urban design and development phasing. Additional information, further technical analysis and revisions are required before the secondary plan can be approved. Next slide. The next steps. If the secondary plan application is denied an appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal, the applicant may ask to combine the appeal with the urban boundary expansion appeal hearing. That that's I guess a request they could make. We don't know if they intend to do that and the scheduling in could be very difficult to do. The applicant may revise and resubmit technical studies. the alternatives to the recommendations by council. Council could approve the Alfrida secondary plan uh amendment with conditions requiring that the applicant revise their secondary plan to address comments provided by staff and external agencies. Council could approve the Alfreda secondary plan as is despite comments and concerns from staff and council could defer the application until the phase 2 tribunal hearing for the Alfrid urban boundary application is completed. Next slide. So I am going to invite uh questions on the presentation but I I would also mention the applicant uh will be making uh a presentation their planner and lawyer it just recently they have resubmitted their application and I think they'll be speaking to that and that concludes my presentation. Thank you Mr. Hayward. Um are there any questions on the presentation? Not seeing any. May I have a mover and second to receive the staff presentation? Councelor Casar, Councelor A. Wilson. And please indicate your vote now. Show of hands. That's unanimous. Thank you. That is carried. So the agent, Mr. David Fetta of Bowsfield and Jennifer Meter of TMA Law are available to delegate. Please come to the podium. Oh, you're sorry. They at the table. >> Where are they? >> Yes, please. >> Okay. As you're taking your seats, just uh alert you that you have five minutes to make your presentation and that time we'll begin once you've begin with your presentation. Welcoming the mayor. Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I'd like to first um start by asking if we could please have um an extension to our time frame now so that we aren't interrupted later. I think we will probably be at least double the the five minute limitation. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um Councelor Paul's has moved that. Is there a seconder? Council Wilson. Um, hand vote for the extra time. I think it carries five to four. Okay. You may have the extra five minutes. So, it's 10-minute presentation. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, the Alfreda Group has two requests of you. Number one, direct staff to work with the Alfrida group on processing its secondary plan resubmission, which you just heard from Mr. Hworth has recently been resubmitted. And number two, direct staff to work with the Alfreda Group to finalize the official plan amendment that will bring Alfreda into the urban boundary. And if you could please move to the next slide. Thank you. So in terms of the first ask, the city issued comments on the Alfreda secondary plan submission on July 3rd, 2026 and the Alfrida group responded as quickly as possible through a resubmission of updated reports and studies that are now with staff. We are confident that the resubmission appropriately addresses the city's outstanding concerns. In terms of the second ask, the outstanding technical issues raised by the city in the urban boundary expansion can be fully addressed through the Alfrida secondary plan process. And for that reason, among others, the urban boundary expansion application and associated appeal can now be finalized. Slide two, please. Or the next slide, please. As I I believe you're aware, uh, Mr. Chair and committee, the Alfreda's urban boundary expansion appeal is being addressed by the Ontario Land Tribunal in two phases. Phase one determined whether Hamilton needs to expand its urban boundary to accommodate future residential growth, and if so, by how much, and phase two will determine whether Alfreda is an appropriate location to accommodate the required growth. So, the phase one land needs hearing culminated in a decision of the Ontario Land Tribunal confirming that the city requires 1,600 gross developable hectares of land to accommodate future residential growth. Alfreda has 985 gross developable hectares, which is approximately 60% of what is needed. The phase 2 technical hearing is scheduled to commence in January 2027 and last for eight weeks. It will determine whether Alphrida should be added to the urban boundary to accommodate the needed growth. But we say it has long been understood that Alfreda is the right location to accommodate Ham Hamilton's required growth. Furthermore, any remaining technical planning issues for Alfreda are more appropriately considered through the details of the secondary plan process which is before you today. The phase 2 technical hearing is therefore not required. Next slide, please. Mr. Dr. Hworth gave you a detailed summary of what has happened in this process over the last two years, but he he did not uh explain to you that the city has been studying the Alfrida area as part of its growth management strategy for more than 20 years. The city chose Alfrida as its next residential growth area in 2006, confirmed that choice in 2009, and again in 2015. The city has already done infrastructure planning and made major financial investments to implement the development of Alfrida. It has been collecting development charges for growth related costs associated with the development of these lands since 29 2009. Proceeding to the phase 2 technical hearing in the face of the land needs hearing decision simply does not make financial sense. Right now, as we speak, you have a team of consultants and staff working through a procedural order and expending significant financial resources to prepare for that hearing. Even though the outcome of that proceeding has almost certainly been decided, we see no point in spending money fighting what we believe is inevitable. It will only serve to drive up the cost of housing. This is why we think respectfully it would be prudent to finalize the phase 2 technical hearing now so that the city and Alfreda can focus their efforts on the secondary plan. The secondary plan process will ensure that growth proceeds in a responsible phased and appropriate manner. Future sight specific development applications will follow each with their own approval and their own public process. Alfreda pays for itself. Development charges and property tax revenue are projected to leave the city in a surplus after considering the full buildout of the infrastructure and and the Alfredo lands. In terms of process, at the time the secondary plan application was submitted, there were gaps in the analysis in certain technical reports that formed part of the submission and and that was noted by Mr. Hayworth in his presentation. But what has not been noted is that those gaps were in part, to be fair, due to problems the Alfreda consultants had in receiving modeling and other information from the city that was necessary to to finalize studies. Alfreda overcame those problems through a back and forth between the consultants and city staff that spanned several months and over a year in in certain instances. Those gaps have now been filled through the addendums to the technical reports included with the resubmission package. We are confident that the majority of the city's outstanding concerns are addressed through the resubmission or can be through further discussions with staff. The Alfredo Group looks forward to working with staff on processing the secondary plan resubmission and delivering muchneeded housing. And I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Fleta to speak to the substantive merits of the secondary plan. Thank you, chair, uh, members of committee and staff and the public. My name is David Fleta and I'm a registered professional planner with Bellfields and we're the planning consultant to the Alfrida uh, Community Builders Group. Um, as as Jennifer mentioned, I'm going to walk you through the application because that's why we're here today. We're here to get some public input given that it is a public meeting. So we wanted to walk you through the general um content of the uh secondary plan. Uh so next slide please. So in in term uh you can go on to the next slide as well please. Thank you. In ter in terms of what the intent of the secondary plan is, the foundation of the plan is centered around obviously the creation of a complete commun community, providing for a full range of pol of housing, uh developing uh comprehensive and integrated transportation network, uh protecting and enhancing the natural heritage system, uh and focusing on sustainability and fiscal responsibility. Uh next slide, please. Um when we set out to create the secondary plan, we did it by establishing a vision and principles which were initiated by uh the city when it first started the secondary plan back in 2016. And we built on some of the work that the city has done and established vision and principles that align with the urban Hamilton official plan. And again, those are generally centered around a community structure which is focused on nodes and corridors, a comprehensive land use plan, an urban design framework. Um, again, a full spectrum of housing, transportation, connectivity, protection, and enhancement of the natural heritage system, and of course, uh, climate change and implementation. Um, next slide, please. The first thing we set out to do, so I'm going to walk you through some of the layers of information and how we arrived at the ultimate secondary plan. And one of the first things we did was to understand and study what the natural heritage system and other areas of influence such as existing uses carst areas. Uh so we mapped those and that's what you're seeing on the on the plan today or on the on the screen today. We mapped these areas and identified uh specific policies to ensure that we protected the natural heritage system. We also made sure that the existing uses um uh could correlate and could coexist with the plan uses within Alfreda. Next slide, please. The next thing we did was we studied uh grading and drainage. We wanted to make sure we understood where the most appropriate locations for those storm water management facilities would be. Identifying the size, shape, um, and general locations to ensure that we're creating, um, a place that that, uh, that did not, uh, create storm water, uh, management issues to surrounding lands. Next slide, please. Then we layered on a comprehensive road network um and it it establishes a network of arterial major collector and minor collector roads. We also ensure that it aligned with the city's complete street guidelines. Um and we wanted to make sure that it was an efficient pattern uh that uh made the most efficient land of new urban areas. Uh next slide please. The next sort of layer of information that we put on top was uh understanding the transit network. So we looked at the existing and planned transit routes within the city's master plans and we also identified how that system could be expanded to include Alrada. Uh next slide please. Uh we layered on top of that uh active transportation routes. Again, we identified those existing and planned routes and we identified how those routes could be expanded into Alrighta. Next slide, please. Then we started to layer a comprehensive system of parks and open space to accommodate the planned population. They were strategically located to ensure that all residents within the planned community would have access to a neighborhood or community park within a reasonable walking distance. Next slide, please. We then worked with the school boards to estimate the number of required schools for each of the school boards and we distributed them throughout the plan. We also placed schools beside either a park or an open space uh to ensure that we're maximizing the availability of uh community amenities. Uh next slide, please. So all of these elements culminated in the secondary plan that's before you today. It includes all forms of housing. We also ensure that there was retail and mixeduse areas um which uh included requirements for mandatory commercial uses to ensure that the required amenities are provided for the planned population. We also identified that the highest densities are centered around the Alrighta Gateway Station where higher order transit is planned. And then finally, the plan results in a total of 983 hectares of developable land accommodating approximately 25,000 units and 64,000 residents and 6,100 jobs. Um so based on our analysis and all of the supporting studies that we were completed, we are of the opinion that the proposed secondary plan is consistent with the provincial planning statement, conforms to the overarching policies of the urban Hamilton official plan, ensures the creation of a complete community, and promotes climate change and sustainability and of course represents uh good planning. I just I want to sort of conclude with with one comment. We do recognize that we just recently filed a resubmission and Jennifer walked you through um uh the amount of time that we had to do the resubmission. We recognize that today's a public meeting and that a lot of the information that's contained within that resubmission hasn't been analyzed by staff. And part of the reason for our request is that we want to work with staff. We want to ensure that you have the information you need to make in a detailed um decision. And then finally, we do think that uh a lot of the information and comments that we receive from staff are very similar that to what you would receive uh and when you're going through this type of secondary planning process and we feel as though we've addressed them, although we do know that additional work is required by your staff. So with that, be happy to answer any questions at this point. Anyone have any questions from committee? Councelor Clark. >> I'll yield if there's any members of the committee that wish to ask questions first. >> I do have some questions, but I can follow you. >> Okay. Um, in your presentation you said that you want us to finalize the secondary plan. What exactly do you mean when you're asking us to finalize the secondary plan? >> Uh through you uh Mr. Chair, uh we're asking essentially two things. That um that you direct staff to finalize the urban boundary expansion official plan amendment uh and and then subsequently uh direct staff to work with um with our consultants to finalize the secondary plan in terms of addressing their outstanding comments. Um we think we are we we think we are there and we don't think it will take much time to finalize the secondary plan. Um we believe the staff ha now have what they need to do that and it's just a matter of um the consultants and staff working together to get to to get that over the finish line. So, what would your client's response be if the committee chose to defer the secondary decision to review the ramifications of the recent Ontario Lens Tribunal decision? >> Uh, through you, Mr. Chair. If uh if first of all, we we we want to um work with staff to finalize the secondary plan regardless of what happens on uh on the urban boundary expansion and and the ramifications of the uh land needs assessment hearing. Um but that said um my clients are not able to commit to a time frame um during which they would not appeal the secondary plan without a reciprocal direction from uh uh from uh the committee or the council to staff to finalize the urban boundary expansion uh official plan amendment. As I said, it's it's sort of a two-part ask. And uh we would ask that that we we think that there's sufficient time for that official plan amendment for the urban boundary expansion to be finalized and brought forward for consideration um at at the uh September 9th council meeting. And if those directions were given, my instructions are to agree to not appeal the secondary plan for at least three months. Okay. Can you speak to the phase two of the Ontario Lands Tribunal hearing? So, the decision has been made on the Ontario Lands needs assessment. What's the rationale for the second phase of that hearing >> through you, Mr. Chair? In my submission, there is no longer a rationale for that second phase of the hearing. the the tribunal has determined that there is a land need of 1600 gross developable hectares and as I indicated um it has long been established that Alfreda is the right place to locate that growth or at least a part of that growth. So the purpose of the phase 2 uh study or excuse me the phase 2 hearing is simply to determine whether or not Alfrida is the appropriate location for growth. And again we believe that is moot that has been studied at Nauseium and this um the city has already indicated that it is the right place to accommodate growth and it's already financially invested significantly towards that end. May I inquire, chair, there are three separate appeals for the OOLT. One's White Church, one's 20 Road, and one is is Alraa. How do you see the government's decision? Let me refrain that because that's not fair. It's not a government decision. is the Ontario Lands Tribunal decision that uh 1,600 hectares is the appropriate amount of it's the it's the correct land that is needed to meet the growth through through you Mr. chair the if I if I understand the the question correctly, there are three um separate urban boundary expansion applications that are before the tribunal. The phase one which was applied to all three of those boundary expansion applications has determined that there is sufficient land to accommodate all three of the applications and there would still be an additional need for more land. Um whether or not the city chooses to proceed with phase two hearings to determine whether the other two applications are appropriate locations for growth um is is of course within the city's purview. Um but we say that the Alfreda has already Alfreda location has already been determined and that is why the phase 2 hearing specifically for Alfreda is obiated. >> Last question sure. So the secondary plan whether it's your first one or your second one it's irrelevant to me. It does not address the external infrastructure costs that are required for us to usually proceed. We chair we usually have a background study. We it it outlines exactly the costs per foot of almost everything that is going in the ground. everything that is being above the ground. Um we don't have that. So not withstanding the premier's recent announcement of um funding for the municipality to get housing underway. How would you suggest that we reach these decisions in terms of what is needed for the external infrastructure while we're still under the threat of an Ontario Lands Tribunal hearing >> through you, Mr. Chair? Um, in my submission, all of that has already been determined. All of the external infrastructure required to service the Alfredo lands has either been constructed, is in the process of being constructed, or is planned and is being financed through the development charges. And that that process has been ongoing since 2009. >> That would be a surprise to me and my residents because we have not seen that external infrastructure in Ward 9. It's not there. They're farmer fields. So I don't know what you're talking about >> through through you chair to the uh to to the counselor. Um so um the resubmission that we made identified some additional modeling in terms of where the pipes will go and how they will connect to the larger scale trunk system which is what Jennifer is referring to. That trunk system basically comes across the doorstep of Alfreda and that identifies the capacity the long-term capacity for um that that Alfreda could connect to and as Jennifer mentioned uh development charges have been collected um and some of that infrastructure has been constructed. Um, I guess the the last element is the information that we just filed with your uh staff identifies how that will ultimately get connected and uh and in addition fiscally how it uh continues to make sense. So you're referencing to be clear the upper Centennial Park sewer trunk that was drilled under Centennial Parkway and then goes down the escarpment and it's your position that that's complete. So we can just proceed with the development in Alfreda. That's not all the external infrastructure needs to develop that community. And by the way, that gravityfed pipe is not connected to anything yet. So I don't understand the submission that everything's there because it's not. >> Yeah. Through through you chair to to the counselor. Um I guess the second part to that answer is that there is planned upgrades at the treatment plant uh that are required regardless. Um and once that plant infrastructure is built, it will provide the capacity needed for Friday. And that again is all explained in our resubmission materials. >> Um and it's not just the increased capacity for the sewer treatment plant. We right now. I I don't know what the costs are going. >> Thank you, Councelor Clark. Um I'm going to change Oh, councelor Casar, you may carry on. Go ahead. >> Thanks, Chair. Uh continuing on with Council Clark's questions about cost, there was a comment made that there'll be a financial surplus uh from this buildout of a secondary plan. So my question to you is through what year did that analysis consider >> through you chair to the to the counselor. Um so in terms of the the planned growth, the planned growth is planned to 201. And then in in terms of um the financial analysis that was completed by um uh our uh our land economist. It it looked at life cycle costs which I think is what you're referring to in terms of long-term costs associated with uh that infrastructure. uh and it concluded that um it is sustainable financially to develop uh alpha and then I guess the that's what our consultant noted um and then I guess the second part to that is uh you don't have to take our word for it uh when the city was going through grids 2 its grids 2 process it uh retained Watson consultant another land economist that also looked at the long-term feasibility ility of expanding into urban boundary expansion areas like Alfreda. And it also concluded that it was more fiscally responsible than coordinating all of the development through um uh through intensification. >> Uh thanks chair. So uh what I read in the report said otherwise, but my question was to what year did the analysis consider? And I didn't hear the answer. So I'd like to get that answer please. Yeah, through through you chair to to the uh to to the counselor. Uh again, the staff report or sorry the the financial analysis looked at the the cost to construct the infrastructure and it the full buildout to 2011 and then it also looked at the life cycle costs which means forever in terms of the replacement costs associated with that infrastructure. So 201 and then the life cycle cost of that infrastructure to replace it. Okay. Thanks, Chair. I'll have more to say about that later. >> Okay. Thank you. So, I'll throw it over to Oh, Council McMe. Go ahead. >> Yeah. Thanks, uh, Chair. Um, as you're probably aware, uh, this has been a hot issue in town in the city. Uh, we I think we had 18,000 um 18 was it 18,000 Brad submissions from various citizens about protecting the urban boundary. largely predicated on a concern about farmland. And I note uh from um Mr. Hayward's presentation that the majority of the negative comments that came up around any expansion related to farmland in particular, I think he said there were 47 comments. Um Ontario's losing 319 acres of prime agricultural land every single day. Uh, it's a concern particularly in a tariff economy where we're concerned about food sovereignty and and all all that sort of stuff. I mean, I know it's pretty pretty soft rhetoric, but I want to just throw it throw it in there. What percentage of the land uh uh that is in question here is uh is rated prime agricultural land? >> Yeah. Through through you chair to to the counselor. Um so as part of our submission on both the uh urban boundary expansion application as well as our secondary plan we completed through Kovville who's our consultant they completed an agricultural impact assessment and that that assessment concluded that relative to other lands within the prime agricultural areas in the city the subject lands are lower priority agricultural lands since the fragmented character of the area, the mix of agricultural and non-aggricultural uses, the proximity of the existing settlement area and the limited investment in agricultural infrastructure and land improvements. It also concluded that prime agricultural areas cannot be avoided to accommodate the uh the planned growth and the land needs that are required. Um and then I guess I I'll conclude that the peer reviewer for that analysis generally concurred with those conclusions. >> So what what uh let me dig just a little deeper. There are different classes of lands, you know, class one, two, three, you get to four, you're you're growing maybe potatoes, but not much more. What what class of of land uh uh are we uh are we talking about here? Is it class one land, class two land? >> Do you know that? >> Yes. Through the chair to to to the counselor. Uh the the class of soils uh has actually long been uh uh argued for for a while. There's the provincial provincial classification uh which was done many many years ago. And then there's also the city's analysis that was done through the lear study. Um both of them uh did not identify these lands as class one. Uh they're generally class three. I'll have to go back to the report to confirm I don't think the entirety of the lands are class 3, but given the analysis uh they're not high quality prime agricultural land. That was what the conclusion was. >> That's helpful. If you have have do have some more information on what this hit. Thanks. Appreciate your comments. >> Thank you. Are there any more questions from committee? I'll just throw the chair over to vice chair uh and Wilson. I'm just going to I was going to say I acknowledge and understand there's housing need and historically you say Alfreda has long been considered the growth area. um the original earlier plans that you cited from 2005 and onward and you've used as justification for your current application. What size of the lands back then were being considered? Um right now you're saying that you need that you're looking at 95 985 hectares. what lands were originally uh looked at back in say the 2000s that do you have that information? >> Yeah. Through you uh new chair to the to the former chair to the councelor. Um, so as it relates to Alfreda specifically, the boundaries of Alfreda have always been fixed given that it's surrounded by green belt uh to the north, east, uh, south and southwest. Um, so it's always been approximately 1,200 hectares of gross land. Uh, it gets netted out to 900 and change once you remove the natural heritage system. major arterial roads. So in terms of the size and and um a as as as you noted earlier as part of the city's grids one process back post amalgamation in 2006 it did identify all of Alida as being the uh preferred future uh urban area. So you're stating that it's always been out to Second Road, out to Hendershot, all the way back to golf club in the same L pattern that you're producing right now. So you're saying that that's always been the case since 200 and whatever >> through you chair to the council. Yes. Since 2006 when when you completed grids one, it's always been that entire area as the future uh uh as a future urban boundary. In terms of the amount of land that it's been needed, it's obviously always been um contested by uh both the city and the land owners across the city in terms of how much land is needed. Um grids one uh culminated in staff recommending that an urban expansion happen. the amount of alrighta that that would have come in was subject to future additional study to determine how much and when. Um, but it's always been earmarked is I think the question uh the answer to the question. >> Okay. And then and I and I understand that this has long been the plan, but you have to acknowledge that sometimes priorities change and um new concepts such as food security are very uh important. So of the 985 hectares that you say can be built upon and aside from whether it's prime agriculture land level one, level two, level three, how much is currently farmed at this point? >> Yeah, through through your chair of the council, I don't have that exact number. Um but it is uh um it is definitely not the majority. I just don't have that number in front of me at the moment, unfortunately. I can pull it up. It might take me a little while, but >> and I'm not allowed to debate you, but I would I would suggest that it is the majority. Um, >> council. >> Yes. Thank you. I won't. Um, okay. Then another question that I have relates to a number of very concerned residents who've seen your your your plans and they feel that you know you're at one point off of Fletcher Road you're building you're you're you're basically stating that that's going to be a schoolyard and a um park land. Does it make sense to use existing residential for those uses or is that something that can change in the process of your future plans? Yeah, through through you uh chair to the counselor, what what we've done with the plan is we've tried to distribute the parkland and and public service facilities throughout the plan area to make sure that every resident is within a um comfortable walking distance to it. We do recognize that um there are some uh parcels of land where there are existing residents that might have some public service facilities on them, but we have proposed within our secondary plan policies that those uses are permitted throughout the plan area. So they can shift and move uh since the only way that they can be developed is through development applications. So we tried to make it as flexible as possible for those existing residents uh in terms of moving their lands forward into the urban uh area. >> So what you're saying then is the residents that are currently living there historically sometimes for five decades or more at apparent time they will not be expropriated. Can you guarantee that >> through through you uh chair to to the counselor? Uh private land owners don't have the ab ability to expropriate land. So if if lands were to be expropriated for public service facilities. In my experience it very rarely happens. Um and in my experience the only way it would happen would be if the school board or the city or some other form of government uh agency would would expropriate it. So I do think it's very highly unlikely. >> So my question then going forward for my last question would be knowing this then why would those schools be designated on your plans in the locations they are knowing that there's existing residents there? That's the concern. >> Yeah. Through through you chair to to the counselor we we recognize that again we tried to put them in the most appropriate locations. We also recognize that um the school board's um uh school needs assessment doesn't always result in the requirement for a school. There's a lot of sites throughout Ontario where school boards earmark them for a school, but they don't get built. Um yeah, so that that's generally our answer. We try to put it in the best location. And again, we'll work with those land owners to ensure that it gets developed appropriately as part of a complete community. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, I'll take the chair back. Are there any more questions from the committee? Not seeing any. May I have a mover and second to receive the delegation from the agent? And one one final thing before we do that. Mr. Fleta, are you in support of the staff report? >> Three, chair. Uh, no, we are not in support of the staff report. Again, we want to continue to work with uh with staff on on moving this application forward. >> Okay, thank you for that clarification. I may have a mover and second to receive the delegation from the agent. Um, councelor Paul's and councelor McMe. Uh, please indicate with a show of hands now. Okay, that carries. We have Thank you. We have 48 written submissions. >> Um, >> more than that. >> Oh, we have more than 48 now. >> Okay. Updated. >> 68. >> 68. Thank you. Um, >> are you going to read them all? >> No, I'm not going to. I'm just going to just say that they were um I spent a considerable amount of time reading through most of them uh that were available at the time that they came out. And at this point, I'll get to the next page. We're going to now hear from registered delegates. And the first delegate is in the room, Neil Freeman. You're here. So, please come to the table to begin your delegation. and um your five minutes will start when you begin talking. Thank you. >> Do we need to receive the correspondence? >> No, not according to this yet. >> Okay. >> But thank you for asking. >> Good morning everyone. My name is Neil Freeman and I am the fourth generation to plant and harvest grain crops on the subject lands that we are considering today. I'd like to thank the Hamilton planning committee, the Hamilton city councilors and Mayor Andrea Horvath for the opportunity to speak to you today. In recent years, my grain yields of wheat, soybeans, and corn on the subject lands have been above the Ontario average stated yields. When we look at a map of Canada, our first impression is that there are lots of arable land to grow food and crops. But that simply is not the case. In Canada, over one half, 52% of prime souls are in Ontario. In Ontario, farmland makes up less than 5% of the land base. According to Statistics Canada, between 2016 and 2021, Ontario lost 319 acres of farmland per day. That's a that's 116,435 acres per year. That is not sustainable. Agricultural land is productive. It's valuable. It's essential. It's finite. And it's nonrenewable. Ladies and gentlemen, does anyone here today think that it is wise to rely on our neighbors to the south to provide food for us? Fellow constituents, rain farmers in Ontario generate over 4.1 billion in production value, which results in 27 billion in economic output. and they generate over 90,000 jobs across Ontario. That is not including the fruit and vegetable farmers. That doesn't include the wine industry or others. Ontario grains are used to feed for feed purposes as well as to make ethanol, biodiesel, antifreeze, toothpaste, lotions, soap, lipstick, glue, plastic, paper, and that's just to name a few. And incidentally, in just 11 summer days, Ontario corn produces enough oxygen for the annual respiratory needs of the whole province. There is no more farmland being uh made. And once it's gone, it isn't coming back. It's one thing to build all these houses, but you still have to feed them, the people. Houses can be built where it isn't productive farmland. Please protect our farmland for future generations because there isn't an endless supply of food. Thank you for this opportunity. >> Thank you, Mr. Freeman. Are there any questions? Uh, Mr. Councelor McMaken. >> Yeah. Thanks. Uh, thanks Sher. Thank you for sharing. >> Yeah. Thanks. Thank you. Thanks for sharing. Um I uh your references to the south of us u um I think we should nominate Donald Trump for the order of Canada because nobody's united Canadians faster than he has. Um but that's that's that's another day another another another your figures around the land as a former minister of agriculture I have some some knowledge of that the the gross domestic product contribution of farming is actually just just a hair over 52 billion and employs that the agra food industry and it's total uh 918,000 people. So you're on the right track. You were very conservative in your numbers. >> Yeah. Anyhow, it you would you acknowledge that uh that that's a that's a possibility >> uh through you chair if I'm using the correct vernacular. Um the information that I have is pertain is is from the grain farmers of Ontario website. That's sure. >> Yeah. The figures I quoted are from the OFA. So that but we're consistent on the 319 acres a day >> that we are. >> And that's tragic. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, councelor. Councelor Clark. Thank you, chair. Thank you, Neil, for appearing today. Um, I represent Ward Nine, which goes from the upper radial valley Parkway to the Grimby Town Line Hydro Corridor to the escarpon. So, the largest portion of my ward is rural in nature with with many farmers, many cash crop farmers also, but they're all farming. Um, I I appreciate what you do for the city of Hamilton as a farmer. Um, can you just tell us where you actually farm? Through you, chair, uh, dear counselor, uh, I farm more than one location. The home farm in particular where I'm referring to here today is on Fletcher Road from the golf club north on the west side as well as a section on the east side. And do you do any cash cropping also? >> We prefer to refer to it as grain farming, but yes. >> Well, in my ward is usually wheat or soybean. They just alternated back and forth. So, we see a great deal of that. So, thank you for appearing today just to rationalize that indeed farming is happening in that area. So, thank you. Thank you, Councelor Clark. Mayor Horvath. >> It's okay. Thank you. >> Uh thank you so much for uh coming to speak to us today. Uh I was interested interested in the numbers that you shared in terms of the amount of uh land that's being actively farmed and just this morning we received a a joint letter from the uh from the the offa Ontario uh farming association farmers association federation rather of agriculture and then the uh federation of agriculture for Hamilton. So, I'm sure you know these organizations well. My question would be um the the difference between the way that you describe how the land is currently currently being used and the suggestion from the presenter that the um that in fact it's not prime agricultural land and quite the opposite and yet both yourself in your uh experience as a person that's farming uh as well as the uh Ontario Federation of Agriculture and the Hamilton Federation's uh letter describe it as and I'm going to quote The lands are not simply vacant or underdeveloped land. Undeveloped land waiting for another use. They include some of the most productive farmland in the country comprised predominantly of class one to class 2 three soils considered prime agricultural land. Then they go on to say approximately 2,987 acres identified in Alfrada are almost exclusively highquality prime agricultural farmland while the approximately 899 acres identified in White Church etc. Based on the productive capacity these lands have the potential each year to produce the equivalent this is to your point of 5.3 million loaves of bread, 1.15 million L of ethanol, 12.8 8 million liters of soy milk and enough hay to feed 83,800 cows for a day. Would you agree with with the um with the remarks that we were provided in the uh correspondence that we received today from the OFA and the uh Federation of Agriculture and the Hamilton Federation >> through you chairman uh to you uh to you mayor Andrew Horvath. Um, yes, I would. I I I don't want to I cannot tell you about the classifications of of the soil. I don't want to speak to that because I don't I don't have accurate information about that. Um, on a side note, I I I don't have the PowerPoint presentation. I do have some in sheets of information that have uh some information about crops. If that's of any use to anyone here today, um I'm happy to distribute them. I don't know what the proper procedure for that is. >> We can provide it to the clerk and the clerk can uh make sure that everybody has uh has it if they have not yet uh received that information. Thank you for that. Let's see. >> Thank you so much. I appreciate you being here. >> Thank you. >> Are there any other members of the committee? One second, sir. We're going to go for first time speakers first. >> Councelor Wilson, M. Wilson, any questions? >> Okay, carry on. >> I really appreciated your delegation. Um, thank you very much for being here. Um, I trust um, it's a very busy time of year for you. Um, so the fact that you made time to be here is appreciated. I don't represent a rural ward, so pardon my ignorance. Um, I'm just trying to understand consequence. Um, I trust that you are renting these lands for agricultural purpose because of their value of soil and the production that they yield. But I am trying to get my head around the so what. Um what does this what would this mean for you um in terms of the OOLT's decision through the chair to uh through your chair to the the counselor for myself. It will leave it will mean uh ultimate loss of revenue, loss of of that um the lands that were that I'm speaking about are near and dear to my heart. It's a I grew up there. My father grew up there. My grandfather grew up there. Um every square inch has not one memory but multiple memories. Um it it doesn't just these lands don't just involve it's not just about me. There are other farmers that are involved too. Um so I'm sure and that that there will be loss of revenue for them as well. But ultimately the the bigger picture is that the more this is allowed to happen the more these continue to happen those 399 acres per day. >> Yep. that's eating up a a large chunk of land every single day and it continues to happen and until something changes it will and and ultimately it it it can't continue. Ultimately, you eventually run out and it's not a good idea to uh rely on other countries to to supply us with food in in my opinion. >> Thank you again uh for for being uh here this morning and sharing that insight that only you can share. Thank you. Thank you, councelor Wilson. Councelor Mikin for a second time. >> Yes. Just thank you. Just for a point of clarification and for the record, I think it should be recorded that the presenter uh did acknowledge that he was speculating about his knowledge of the classes of land. Um he speculated that most of it was class three land. Uh he admitted he didn't know what the other classifications were and that he would get back to us. So I just think that that that should be remembered by those uh who have heard that presentation. >> Thank you. >> Noted and that he also noted that there were bumper crops. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Not seeing any more questions. Mr. Freeman, thank you for your delegation today. >> Thank you. This is going to get fun now because the people are outside and we're going to say, are there any members of the public that wish to speak at this public meeting? >> Thank you. So, welcome to the committee. Um, you'll have five minutes to make your delegation and you can identify yourself first and then uh you have five minutes to present. Thank you. And then afterwards we may ask you some questions. >> Wonderful. Thank you. My name is Phil Lee. I live at 535 Fletcher Road. the one of the homes that has been designated as a new park and uh been there now for 47 years. And in that 47 years prior to the year 2000, Glenn Brook had what? We were in the black always every year. We had zero crime. Now check out Facebook. As a result of Facebook and social media, my wife is having me put up security gates. We have racing going down my street multiple times an hour. It's interesting that the comment was made that the goal is to make this a safe community. Could we begin now? Could we begin? Now I I guess secondly, my wife and I decided, now this is personal, but then I was I was wonderful to hear Mr. Freeman's personal comments. My wife and I decided, you know, as in retirement, and I'm 70 now, but I've been continued to work. Hey, you know what? We've invested $100,000 in our home to take care of not just ourself, but to make it an aging ability home for our other families as well. Granny suite, bathroom, kitchen, etc. And when this plan came out, the secondary plan came out, um this week I called real estate agents. I said, "What's the been the impact on my real estate?" is that anyone who goes and looks at uh the secondary plan and sees that your property has now been designated as a public park will say the real estate agent will say that means it's been designated that way because the uh uh the developers will not have to buy it but the city will force you to expropriate and that will be the fear. So, anyone who wants a piece of real estate and rural 1acre small bungalow now is going to be very difficult to sell. And that's not does not just apply to me. I I think out there right now there are four or five other family members in my on the same street that have been designated a park. So, I have submitted a written request asking for what's the impact and how is the city going to help us out. Uh to be perfectly honest, we're not supportive of uh the Alfrida development even for reasons Mr. Freeman said. I mean, we we need we need the agricultural land. Um, but I bet my my wife's biggest concern is the safety in the community right now. And I think that's pretty much summarizes our concerns. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Leaf. Um, I'm just going to see if we have any questions. Not seeing any. I just wanted to thank you for your delegation. I have heard from all the people from 511 to 629 Fletcher Road. I've spoken with them well with both those families and um and then the representative Sam. So, thank you very much for coming in and delegating, giving us your lived experience. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> And I just want to say I appreciate the couple of counselors that have been challenging the presentation. Thank you very much. You know, we appreciate you. I got to be honest. I really wonder if my vote really matters anymore, especially when the government can come and say, "No, mayor, override that decision or whatever, you know, and uh so I I I really appreciate the fact that my vote can matter." >> Thank you, Phil. >> I'd just like to clarify. Uh >> that's not how it works. >> Yeah. With the strong mirror powers, it's not exactly how that that works. Um the mayor makes the decisions basically and there's nobody that issues that that's your sole decision. Correct. Okay. Is there anything else you'd like to say about that? >> Thank you. Just to be clear, the government of Ontario or any government doesn't tell the mayor uh how to decide. It's a very thoughtful decision-making process that any mayor has to go through now with a new legislation uh that uh that requires the mayors to do certain things that we don't have a choice on and other things we do. Um I just want to make it clear because there's a lot of misunderstanding and there's a lot of misinformation uh being um uh put out there. Let's just put it that way and people deserve to know the facts. So, thank you. I appreciate that. Chair, >> thank you for that clarification, mayor. Um, next delegate is that the chair sir, could you identify your name and then uh you have five minutes to speak. Thank you. >> Okay. So, moving forward, I'd like to just mention I am uh a person of uh AODD compliancy law. So, I like under disability. So, we could extend that time just because I will be short. My phone might not I might not be able to read correctly. So, if that could be extended to 10 minutes, that would be great. It won't actually be 10 minutes, but it'll give me the ability with my disability to be able to move forward. >> Okay. I see that councelor uh A Wilson and councelor M. Wilson will support that and will hands up to support. Thank you. You may carry on. >> Okay. Um I have grown up in this community for 32 years. >> Oh, please could you identify yourself? >> Oh, sorry. My name is Andrew Le. My pronouns are they them. >> Okay. Thank you. I've grown up in this community for 32 years and I think I know a thing or two about what my community is. I have uh been taught what family is based on this uh what belong what belonging looks like in a world where people say people like me don't when it comes to the city when it comes sorry when when will the city become like me and by this I mean when will it rather than focusing on outward viewpoints focus inward into themselves and invest in our downtown core as well as fixing the already problem issues in our city like the homelessness living in tents huge and the huge drug use as well as the opioid issues. Even for me, uh I work full-time, so I did not know that this was actually happening uh until actually two days ago when I was informed by a fellow neighbor that let me know it was happening. Um what I'm also wanting to point out is for us as people in the community up there, we do not feel comfortable coming downtown. I have not been downtown prior to today till 5 years ago. The reason being we do not feel as though we are safe in our downtown core. Um they say it's a park. It's not a park. This is taking away the history of Hanman. The heritage houses that are affordablesized homes that were built for families that wanted a normal house with three bedrooms and a bathroom. The house the houses that are being built and installed are multi-level and for lack of better term substandard cut cornered houses. You just have to look at how many of the houses of the new construction area have already needed the roofs redone or reshingled when the city stepped up and uh when will we step up and fix other issues? Example, when you're coming down Fletcher's Road because of the two schools and the planning that was made, um you can't get down our road. If the schools are open, you literally have to sit on the road and wait because people are not checking when they're opening their doors. I've actually almost had two accidents on our street because people are not watching. Prior to this, Fletcher Road had no problems. Garbage, you wouldn't see it. Now, if you go down our road, you will generally see bags of garbage. We've actually seen full bed sets. We've seen full furniture, nightstands, you name it, we've seen it um tossed right out the back of vehicles. I've watched actually and I heard the gentleman prior say that the soil is not good. Um I've actually watched people in the area stop, take the corn out of the field, throw it in the back of their car, and drive off. This is not farmland that that's not being used. This isn't. And if they cared when they were here and they wanted to hear everybody's perspective, they would have sat in that hallway where we're all sitting and been able to hear our point of view. They don't care about our point of view. They only care about their bottom line. When it comes to addressing the meeting concerns, I will also also like to point out, and I'm not asking this as a question. I'm just stating this as fact. When you look into the extra jobs, they said 6,000. I would like to know personally where those are coming from. If you look, majority of our students and people that are attending schools like Mohawk College and McMaster University, um I have a friend who went actually to Ryerson University, um and got all of their paperwork. I will tell you personally and I will not tell you where they are working because that is private but they are working minimum wage jobs because we do not have jobs. I personally have a college I have with my disability gone and gone through college after being told by the Hamilton school board that I would not be successful. I have gone through and I graduated Mohawk. um on the deans list. For me though, I still cannot get a job in my field because there are no jobs. >> Andrew, >> yes, >> the topic is the land in Ala >> and I'm addressing that because I'm saying the land issue and I am a part of that issue. >> Just keep it keep it relevant for us, please. and also addressing the fact that the gentleman prior had mentioned that there were jobs. And so I'm saying based on the information brought forward, Mr. Counselor, that that is addressing that issue of jobs that we don't have. And I would be interested prior, I'm not saying it has to be addressed now, in knowing what those jobs are because there are a majority of young people of my age who are extremely educated and knowledgeable that don't Okay. And that's fair. Carry on. The other thing I wanted to address is they're saying it's it's an area that they're going to be building and then this is getting back to addressing it. The area is being built for public space. My question is why? Because we have the BIM conservation area just down the road. number of times you look in the parks and around us even there is parks down in uh in Summit Park, those parks sit empty. They're not looking for parks. They're looking for houses that are sitting that they can use, flip the land and double the price. That's it. I'm just point that's all I'm pointing out is that we have actually and the other thing would be is we're a multigenerational family. gentleman that you just heard was actually my father. Um, and I know um, Miss Miss Clark or sorry, Miss Sorry, Miss Paul. Sorry, I get I'm a little nervous. Uh, we actually went to church together. Um, but what I'm what I'm basically getting at is this is not to get rid of this is this is more than this. Like, you know what I mean? I'm just saying like it's it's kind of crazy to me personally, but that's that's that's personal, but I'm just saying. Thank you. Thank you, Andrew. Are you finished then? >> Yes. >> Okay. Are there any questions? >> I'm not seeing any questions. So, again, thank you for your delegation. You can take a seat outside and uh listen to the next delegate. Good day. So, I'm the chair. I'm councelor Tatison from W 11. And I just wanted to um welcome you to the committee meeting. And you have five minutes. The first thing you need to do is state your name for us. >> Uh my name is Dan McCran. >> Okay. >> Um we built our house 35 years ago. We're on Highway 56 within this uh this chunk. So, we're on the south side of 56 between Golf Club and Rhl. Um, just a couple concerns I'd like you guys to look at before you approve any of this stuff. Um, uh, mainly the traffic. Um, when we built the house years ago, I barely had to look out the driveway to, uh, get on to Highway 56. Now, sometimes it's five minutes or more before I can even get out. Um, I think it's probably maxed out with traffic just with the expansion in Bimbrook. There's times a day at rush hour that it's just bumper to bumper. Um, also all the I don't know whether they're debating widening 56. I don't know whether that's in their plan or not, but um, what effect that would have on us. Um, and all the traffic on all the other rural roads. I think it'd be nice to think that everybody is just going to come up Upper Centennial and go to their houses, but you've got all the other rural roads like First Road, Second Road, you got the mountain accesses, New Mountain Road, Dwit Road. I you should take into consideration what that how it's going to impact those uh uh those roads. And my other concern is how they're going to ab butt up to existing houses. Say up to our backyard. We have an acre lot, but um how they will we be looking out our back window at threetory town houses in the future. Um just wondering. So that's my only concerns of how it's going to affect us. Obviously, you can tell I'm opposed to it, but uh we've seen the green belt signs go up over the years, come down, then it's going to get built on. Originally, it couldn't get built on. So, uh yeah, that's all I that's my concerns. >> Okay, thanks for those um questions and I I think your counselors can ask that to staff and to um people at the appropriate time, but thanks for coming down today. Your delegation's appreciated and uh so noted for all those issues in the rural areas. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any members of the public that wish to speak at this public meeting? think she's coming back. >> No, go ahead and ask again. >> Final time. Are there any members of the public that wish to speak at this public meeting? Yeah, just wait seconds. Do you think she'll be coming back now? Just give me a moment to stay up there. >> Not seeing anyone coming forward from the anti room. Um, may I have a mover and seconder that the public submissions be received and considered by committee councelor Pauls and councelor Nan. Please indicate with an electronic vote now. Bear with me to confirm uh your voting to receive the uh public submissions. That's the written submissions and all the delegations and to close the public meeting. Affirmed. >> I'm sorry. Who are the We're just waiting for it to come up. It's loading. First vote is always the longest. And it's up now for your vote to receive public submissions and to close the public meeting. >> Mc Beacon is not here. I never got it. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Uh, for one moment >> because I'm not normally on committee. >> Yeah, you >> only a thumbs up is fine. >> Don't you get to vote anyways? >> Huh? >> Don't you get to vote at every committee meeting? >> I don't know. >> You do get to vote. Mayor Horthvath, you do get to vote. Uh, you're not in the vote, but thumbs up. Did I hear you say thank you? There's >> Thank you. and it's carried nine nothing >> that carries nine to zero 10 oh sorry that carries 10 to zero >> at this time um I'm going to seek a mover and seconder to defer consideration of the report until after close session councelor Paul's and councelor A Wilson and that's going to take an electronic vote or just a hands up. Okay, hands up now. Thank you. That carries. So, at this time we will go into the private and confidential section and I will begin the long read. May I have a mover and say we already did that, right? I just did that already. No, you still need to do >> Okay. I'll still need a mover and secondary to move into close session respecting items 5.1 pursuant to section 9.3 subsections EF of the city's procedural bylaw 21-021 as amended and sections 2392 subsections E and F of the Ontario Municipal Act 2001 as amended as the subject matter pertains to litigation or potential litigation and including matters before administrative tribunals affecting the city or a local board. advice that is subject to solicitor client privilege including communications necessary for that purpose. So please indicate by a show of hands. All in favor? One, two, three. Councelor Casar, you're in favor. Thank you. That's unanimous for the people that were here. >> Uh the mover and second are originally we'll go with Paul's and oh she here. So Nan and M Wilson. >> Nan and Wilson. >> Yeah. >> And everyone is in favor. >> Yes. four seats. >> And that motion carries. Members of the public, the meeting will continue following the closed session portion of the meeting when you see the members of the committee rejoin the meeting. Committee will wait up to 5 minutes upon reconvening and open session before proceeding with the meeting to provide members of the public and the media time to return. Before we move into close session, I'd like to ask all members of the public to please exit council chambers or this room 264 and the WebEx meeting now. Thank you. And staff that are not directly related to item 5.1 are asked to please exit the meeting now. Thank you. A reminder to all members of the committee to please ensure you move into close session portion of escribe. I also remind members of the committee that as per section 8.7 the procedural bylaw, the use of personal electronic devices during closed meetings is strictly prohibited and the use of city electronics during closed meetings are limited to text communications only and not as a telephone recording device or camera. Staff from the office of the city clerk are exempted from subsection 8.7 when using electronic devices for recordkeeping purposes. When the clerk has determined not only the appropriate attendees are still in the room and the MX and the WebEx, we will move to item 5.1 Okay, we're back in open session now and uh we're at 5.1 LS24020. May I have a mover and seconder to approve directions given in close session and that the report be received and remain confidential. Please indicate your vote by a show of hands now. >> I'm going to do this >> through you, Mr. Chair, because we have staff direction. I'm going to do uh take an electronic vote. >> Oh, okay. And then I guess did we get the mover and seconder? Okay, we'll get we'll go with um councelor Mikin and councelor Pauls. Megan poll. >> Yes. >> Recommendation. >> This is not that point. This that that portion. This is just the um this is just approving the directions given in closed session and that the report be received and remain confidential. >> Then we'll be going to that next that session next. And it's and it's going to be an electronic vote >> and it was Mcme and >> and Paul's >> no. >> Okay. And >> so just for the close session portion is what we're voting on now. >> Yes. And um sorry your thumbs up. Thank you. And council council man you're in favor. Oh, there we go. And councelor is gone. Oops, sorry. Councelor McMe, >> you're in favor. Thank you. >> So, it's 10 to zero. >> Okay. So, that passes 10 to zero. And now we're moving on to the report. May I have a mover and seconder to approve the recommendations in the report? Councelor Casar, Councelor McMaken. Uh I hesitate to ask if anyone has any questions for staff on the report. Not seeing any. Um we will indicate our vote now and a vote of yes supports the recommendations of staff to deny. Sorry and is that right? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Any question? No questions. >> No questions. >> Okay. >> Councelor McNe. Thank you. to zero >> 10 to zero. >> Okay, that is a 10 to zero vote in favor. Um before we adjurnn, I'll remind members that a special council meeting a special meeting of council will follow this meeting. There being no further business, the planning committee is adjourned at 2:39 and we will convene in >> 30 minutes. >> 30 minutes. 309