A hearing for the appeal of zoning bylaw variances for a residential development at 24 Brock St. N. was adjourned Dec. 17 for the third time in less than a year.
With a pending change in ownership the property remains in limbo, as do residents of the surrounding northwest Dundas neighbourhood many of whom have been negotiating and battling for more than six years.
Bill Hilson, who appealed the June 2017 City of Hamilton committee of adjustment approval of seven variances, said Monday he’s not going anywhere. He’s invested too much time and money to give up now.
“It just prolongs it,” Hilson said. “It just prolongs a resolution,”
Former 24 Brock St. N. and 363 Park St. W. owner Alex Szabo sold the two properties to Red Dot Brock 1 and Red Dot Brock 2 of Brampton in January 2017, after settling a previous Ontario Municipal Board appeal regarding his development proposal.
The new owners applied for variances to the zoning bylaw agreed to by Szabo and neighbours and supported by the city.
Hilson and other neighbours argued the variances contradicted the minutes of settlement approved by the OMB. The committee granted conditional approval and Hilson appealed the decision.
In his appeal, Hilson states “variances requested by the developer and granted by the (committee of adjustment) are a breach of the (Ontario Municipal Board) minutes of settlement agreed upon by all parties dated Nov. 6, 2013.”
Hilson’s appeal states, "the developer submitted variances to the Committee of Adjustment knowingly breaching the agreement of the board minutes of settlement."
And that the agreement between neighbours, the city and the previous owner applied "good planning principles and procedures of the Planning Act."
Red Dot Brock requested and received adjournments to two scheduled appeal hearings, Jan. 18 and May 25, 2018. The owners’ mortgage was transferred to a group including two numbered companies, each with two directors and four additional individuals in June 2017. There were also changes to Red Dot Brock’s administration. The two properties were subsequently put up for sale by the group of mortgage lenders. The original asking price was $6 million and later dropped to $4.5 million.
Sajid Rehmatullah, president of Sage Development Corporation in Markham, attended the Dec. 17 Local Planning and Appeal Tribunal hearing. He said he will be the properties’ new owner, after a power of sale closes. He would be the third owner of the two sites within two years. Rehmatullah told tribunal member Justin Duncan the sale was anticipated to close on Friday, Dec. 21.
“I’m buying it from the mortgagees,” Rehmatullah said.
He told Duncan that although he was aware of the appeal, he did not have time to get a lawyer and planner to represent him at the scheduled hearing.
“There are a lot of moving parts (to the purchase),” Rehmatullah said.
He had requested an adjournment days before the scheduled hearing on Thursday, Dec. 13, but LPAT denied the request. He repeated the request on Monday morning.
Hilson’s lawyer, Peter Pickfield, opposed the adjournment request.
“We are ready to proceed today because we were notified that the request to adjourn was denied,” Pickfield said. “I don’t believe Mr. Rehmatullah acted reasonably.
“There have been two previous adjournments. This time we are really at the last minute. It’s starting to become expensive.”
Pickfield said if the LPAT member did not agree with moving ahead, he would want to discuss Rehmatullah covering his client’s costs. The anticipated new owner said he was willing to do so.
“One of my concerns is we don’t even have the current owner in front of us,” tribunal member Duncan said.
After a brief recess, Duncan decided to grant the adjournment and an order for Rehmatullah to cover costs.
He directed Rehmatullah to arrange his lawyer and planning representative by Jan. 4, and begin working with Pickfield and LPAT’s hearing co-ordinator to schedule a fourth hearing date.
“I don’t anticipate having a hearing date for another six months,” Duncan said, referring to a backlog of appeal cases.
Pickfield was told to make submissions on costs by Jan. 11 and Rehmatullah’s representative has until Jan. 18 to respond.
Afterwards, Rehmatullah confirmed he plans to pursue the proposal made by 24 Brock’s previous owners, which includes increasing the building’s density from 48 to 51 units. The proposal also decreases side and rear yards. among a total of seven variances to the existing zoning bylaw.
The zoning of 24 Brock St. N. permits a four-storey, 48-unit residential building with a maximum height of just over 14 metres. There is currently no development proposal for the industrial site at 363 Park St. W.
A hearing for the appeal of zoning bylaw variances for a residential development at 24 Brock St. N. was adjourned Dec. 17 for the third time in less than a year.
With a pending change in ownership the property remains in limbo, as do residents of the surrounding northwest Dundas neighbourhood many of whom have been negotiating and battling for more than six years.
Bill Hilson, who appealed the June 2017 City of Hamilton committee of adjustment approval of seven variances, said Monday he’s not going anywhere. He’s invested too much time and money to give up now.
“It just prolongs it,” Hilson said. “It just prolongs a resolution,”
Former 24 Brock St. N. and 363 Park St. W. owner Alex Szabo sold the two properties to Red Dot Brock 1 and Red Dot Brock 2 of Brampton in January 2017, after settling a previous Ontario Municipal Board appeal regarding his development proposal.
The new owners applied for variances to the zoning bylaw agreed to by Szabo and neighbours and supported by the city.
Hilson and other neighbours argued the variances contradicted the minutes of settlement approved by the OMB. The committee granted conditional approval and Hilson appealed the decision.
In his appeal, Hilson states “variances requested by the developer and granted by the (committee of adjustment) are a breach of the (Ontario Municipal Board) minutes of settlement agreed upon by all parties dated Nov. 6, 2013.”
Hilson’s appeal states, "the developer submitted variances to the Committee of Adjustment knowingly breaching the agreement of the board minutes of settlement."
And that the agreement between neighbours, the city and the previous owner applied "good planning principles and procedures of the Planning Act."
Red Dot Brock requested and received adjournments to two scheduled appeal hearings, Jan. 18 and May 25, 2018. The owners’ mortgage was transferred to a group including two numbered companies, each with two directors and four additional individuals in June 2017. There were also changes to Red Dot Brock’s administration. The two properties were subsequently put up for sale by the group of mortgage lenders. The original asking price was $6 million and later dropped to $4.5 million.
Sajid Rehmatullah, president of Sage Development Corporation in Markham, attended the Dec. 17 Local Planning and Appeal Tribunal hearing. He said he will be the properties’ new owner, after a power of sale closes. He would be the third owner of the two sites within two years. Rehmatullah told tribunal member Justin Duncan the sale was anticipated to close on Friday, Dec. 21.
“I’m buying it from the mortgagees,” Rehmatullah said.
He told Duncan that although he was aware of the appeal, he did not have time to get a lawyer and planner to represent him at the scheduled hearing.
“There are a lot of moving parts (to the purchase),” Rehmatullah said.
He had requested an adjournment days before the scheduled hearing on Thursday, Dec. 13, but LPAT denied the request. He repeated the request on Monday morning.
Hilson’s lawyer, Peter Pickfield, opposed the adjournment request.
“We are ready to proceed today because we were notified that the request to adjourn was denied,” Pickfield said. “I don’t believe Mr. Rehmatullah acted reasonably.
“There have been two previous adjournments. This time we are really at the last minute. It’s starting to become expensive.”
Pickfield said if the LPAT member did not agree with moving ahead, he would want to discuss Rehmatullah covering his client’s costs. The anticipated new owner said he was willing to do so.
“One of my concerns is we don’t even have the current owner in front of us,” tribunal member Duncan said.
After a brief recess, Duncan decided to grant the adjournment and an order for Rehmatullah to cover costs.
He directed Rehmatullah to arrange his lawyer and planning representative by Jan. 4, and begin working with Pickfield and LPAT’s hearing co-ordinator to schedule a fourth hearing date.
“I don’t anticipate having a hearing date for another six months,” Duncan said, referring to a backlog of appeal cases.
Pickfield was told to make submissions on costs by Jan. 11 and Rehmatullah’s representative has until Jan. 18 to respond.
Afterwards, Rehmatullah confirmed he plans to pursue the proposal made by 24 Brock’s previous owners, which includes increasing the building’s density from 48 to 51 units. The proposal also decreases side and rear yards. among a total of seven variances to the existing zoning bylaw.
The zoning of 24 Brock St. N. permits a four-storey, 48-unit residential building with a maximum height of just over 14 metres. There is currently no development proposal for the industrial site at 363 Park St. W.
A hearing for the appeal of zoning bylaw variances for a residential development at 24 Brock St. N. was adjourned Dec. 17 for the third time in less than a year.
With a pending change in ownership the property remains in limbo, as do residents of the surrounding northwest Dundas neighbourhood many of whom have been negotiating and battling for more than six years.
Bill Hilson, who appealed the June 2017 City of Hamilton committee of adjustment approval of seven variances, said Monday he’s not going anywhere. He’s invested too much time and money to give up now.
“It just prolongs it,” Hilson said. “It just prolongs a resolution,”
Former 24 Brock St. N. and 363 Park St. W. owner Alex Szabo sold the two properties to Red Dot Brock 1 and Red Dot Brock 2 of Brampton in January 2017, after settling a previous Ontario Municipal Board appeal regarding his development proposal.
The new owners applied for variances to the zoning bylaw agreed to by Szabo and neighbours and supported by the city.
Hilson and other neighbours argued the variances contradicted the minutes of settlement approved by the OMB. The committee granted conditional approval and Hilson appealed the decision.
In his appeal, Hilson states “variances requested by the developer and granted by the (committee of adjustment) are a breach of the (Ontario Municipal Board) minutes of settlement agreed upon by all parties dated Nov. 6, 2013.”
Hilson’s appeal states, "the developer submitted variances to the Committee of Adjustment knowingly breaching the agreement of the board minutes of settlement."
And that the agreement between neighbours, the city and the previous owner applied "good planning principles and procedures of the Planning Act."
Red Dot Brock requested and received adjournments to two scheduled appeal hearings, Jan. 18 and May 25, 2018. The owners’ mortgage was transferred to a group including two numbered companies, each with two directors and four additional individuals in June 2017. There were also changes to Red Dot Brock’s administration. The two properties were subsequently put up for sale by the group of mortgage lenders. The original asking price was $6 million and later dropped to $4.5 million.
Sajid Rehmatullah, president of Sage Development Corporation in Markham, attended the Dec. 17 Local Planning and Appeal Tribunal hearing. He said he will be the properties’ new owner, after a power of sale closes. He would be the third owner of the two sites within two years. Rehmatullah told tribunal member Justin Duncan the sale was anticipated to close on Friday, Dec. 21.
“I’m buying it from the mortgagees,” Rehmatullah said.
He told Duncan that although he was aware of the appeal, he did not have time to get a lawyer and planner to represent him at the scheduled hearing.
“There are a lot of moving parts (to the purchase),” Rehmatullah said.
He had requested an adjournment days before the scheduled hearing on Thursday, Dec. 13, but LPAT denied the request. He repeated the request on Monday morning.
Hilson’s lawyer, Peter Pickfield, opposed the adjournment request.
“We are ready to proceed today because we were notified that the request to adjourn was denied,” Pickfield said. “I don’t believe Mr. Rehmatullah acted reasonably.
“There have been two previous adjournments. This time we are really at the last minute. It’s starting to become expensive.”
Pickfield said if the LPAT member did not agree with moving ahead, he would want to discuss Rehmatullah covering his client’s costs. The anticipated new owner said he was willing to do so.
“One of my concerns is we don’t even have the current owner in front of us,” tribunal member Duncan said.
After a brief recess, Duncan decided to grant the adjournment and an order for Rehmatullah to cover costs.
He directed Rehmatullah to arrange his lawyer and planning representative by Jan. 4, and begin working with Pickfield and LPAT’s hearing co-ordinator to schedule a fourth hearing date.
“I don’t anticipate having a hearing date for another six months,” Duncan said, referring to a backlog of appeal cases.
Pickfield was told to make submissions on costs by Jan. 11 and Rehmatullah’s representative has until Jan. 18 to respond.
Afterwards, Rehmatullah confirmed he plans to pursue the proposal made by 24 Brock’s previous owners, which includes increasing the building’s density from 48 to 51 units. The proposal also decreases side and rear yards. among a total of seven variances to the existing zoning bylaw.
The zoning of 24 Brock St. N. permits a four-storey, 48-unit residential building with a maximum height of just over 14 metres. There is currently no development proposal for the industrial site at 363 Park St. W.