Two towers are proposed for the southwest corner of King Street East and Centennial Parkway Credit: HANDOUT

The City is “using a backwards-looking approach” to development, says lawyer Denise Baker in her opening arguments at the Ontario Land Tribunal on behalf of a developer seeking zoning permissions for two tall buildings at a major intersection on the East Hamilton / Stoney Creek border.

Camaro Group wants to upzone the property they own, 2900 King Street East, on the southeast corner of King Street East and Centennial Parkway South, to permit the development of two towers (20-storey and 18-storey) connected by a six-storey podium with 564 units.

They appealed to the OLT on November 23, 2002, after city staff expressed they could not recommend approval of the proposal.

Today was the first day of the scheduled ten-day hearing in front of the Tribunal Member Tee Fung Ng.

Ng asked lawyers for the developer and city to present their opening arguments.

Baker told OLT Member Tee Fung Ng that she’ll show during the hearing the development proposal meets the requirements of Ontario’s Growth Plan.

She will argue that both King Street and Centennial Parkway are appropriate streets for higher-density housing, and that having ground-level retail is good land use planning at the intersection.

“This is a site on the periphery of a residential neighbourhood that is well suited for high-density development,” Baker stated. “You will hear evidence from the applicant’s witnesses that there are no adverse impacts associated with the proposed development.”

Baker repeatedly emphasized that Hamilton City Council voted to freeze the city’s urban boundary.

In doing so, Baker argues, the City cannot turn around and argue against higher densities at this location.

OLT Member Ng turned to lawyer Brian Duxbury for the City. Duxbury said the City until later in the hearing to make its statement.

In pre-hearing submissions, the City says the proposal is incompatible with “the scale and character of existing residential neighbourhoods,” does not conform with City design requirements, such as lacking the use of an angular plane and not stepping back from the public right-of-way, and other technical concerns.

Ward 5 Councillor Matt Francis opposes this development because it is not on the LRT corridor, is close to the downtown Stoney Creek core, and “will set a precedent in downtown Stoney Creek.”

The hearing is being conducted by video conference and is scheduled to end on Friday, January 26.


Production Details
v. 1.0.1
Published: January 15, 2024
Last edited: January 15, 2024
Author: Joey Coleman
Edit Record
v. 1.0.0 original version
v. 1.0.1 minor typo fixed

Join the Conversation

2 Comments

  1. This looks like something in North York circa 1994. What European city did that cyclist teleport from? Turn around before it’s too late!

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *