City of Brantford’s Planning Committee unanimously voted against supporting an application for a zoning by-law amendment needed to facilitate the development of an apartment building on West Street during its meeting on Thursday, January 22, 2026.
The site for the proposed building is located on the western side of West Street, between Charing Cross Street and Galileo Boulevard. The land currently consists of two separate parcels at 342 and 346 West St., which in total, make up 0.60 acres of land.
As part of the proposal, the ten-storey building would contain 90 units and a total of 89 parking spaces, 80 spots for residential units and nine for visitors. Additionally, the plan also includes 47 long-term as well as nine short-term bicycle parking spaces proposed for a total of 56 bicycle parking spaces on-site
During the meeting, Sharon Yin, an urban planner with Stantec Consulting Inc. (the agent submitting the application on behalf of The Hanly Group Inc.), provided further details about the proposed parking.
“Some of the additional spaces are being provided through an automated parking lift system,” she explained “All the proposed parking spaces will be fully enclosed within a parking garage with one level of underground parking as well as one level of ground floor parking.”
Yin added that while they had heard various concerns from residents about the potential increase in traffic, a Transportation Impact Study found there would be no issues.
“The study accounts for a future scenario that includes the forecast traffic up to the two future developments along West Street, and it was determined that the traffic generated by this development would not significantly increase traffic volumes beyond what is forecasted in the future without this development,” she said.
When it came down to concerns around whether the proposed development was appropriate for the area, Dora Coll, an intermediate development planner with the City of Brantford, later explained to the committee that the lands are designated as an Intensification Corridor within the City’s Official Plan, meaning that high-rise buildings are permitted and encouraged.
“West Street is an arterial road, which means that it’s designed to move large volumes of traffic, and since West Street can accommodate more traffic, it’s meant to function as a connective spine in the city,” she said. “For this reason, many properties along West Street, including the subject lands, are designated as an Intensification Corridor in the City’s Official Plan. These corridors are where the City is aiming to see intensification, infrastructure investment and infill developments.”
Because the Provincial Planning Statement [PSS] also encourages the redevelopment of underutilized land, staff were recommending that the zoning by-law application be approved.
Following the presentations, committee members had the opportunity to ask questions and share their comments on the development.
Councillor Greg Martin asked how the automated parking stacker would work and raised concerns about the lack of space for emergency vehicles, Ubers or delivery trucks to park outside the building. The applicant, Inna Hanson, said they still needed to finalize all of those details and that they would be addressed during the site plan stage.
Councillor John Sless then asked about how residents would enter and exit the property.
“Your traffic study indicates that the number of cars projected to be living in this building will not have a significant impact on the road system, which is probably true, but how do they access it?” he asked. “You’re on the middle of a hill and the hill has occasionally been shut down in the winter because of dangerous conditions when there’s snow and ice. I’m very curious how one would exit that building and turn left [towards Charing Cross].”
Hanson noted that there are future plans for the City to widen the road, and they have had multiple discussions with staff in regards to finding a solution to make it as safe as possible, while keeping those future plans in mind.
One option would be right-in, right-out access only, meaning that drivers could only enter or leave the property by turning right, and left turns wouldn’t be allowed, explained Hanson.
Sless later said he ultimately had a number of concerns about the proposal.
“It looks like it’s too much on too little. We’re really starting to jam it in there, and I don’t think it fits very well,” he said. “I can’t imagine exiting that building. I know there’s [a potential] right-in, right-out, and that can be dictated, but it doesn’t mean that it’s going to be complied with. If you lived in that building, you’d also have to go really out of your way if you were heading to King George Road, which is where a lot of the commercial activity would take place.”
“It just looks like there’s too many things that have to be worked out during the site plan approval process, and they’re big things,: continued Sless. “…I don’t think that’s the place to take on major changes to a project. So having said that, I won’t be supporting this.”
Councillor Rose Sicoli added that while she was okay with amending the height restrictions to let the developers build the ten-storey building, the project as presented was just too dense.
“It’s kind of bordering on inappropriate for this area. Aside from the lack of appropriate space on the perimeter for access for snow removal and for first responders, as it looks right now, it really does nothing to cater to the modern day realities,” she said. “Where’s an Amazon driver going to pull over? Where’s an Uber driver going to pull over? They’re going to stop on West Street and run in …and it’s going to absolutely cripple the flow of traffic there.”
“I think it would overpower the neighbourhood, and I think it would completely impede the flow of traffic there,” continued Sicoli. “…So I’m not going to be supporting this today either.”
Councillors Richard Carpenter and Martin also shared similar sentiments, and the vote to turn down the application was carried 4-0.
The planning committee’s decision was later brought forward to Council during the regular meeting on Tuesday, January 27, 2026.
During the meeting, two delegations, Karleigh Csordas and Gabrielle Tetro, also had the opportunity to share their thoughts and concerns on the matter. Both of them brought up issues with traffic, the shortfall in parking, various safety issues, the requested minimum setbacks and the lack of a turn around area.
After hearing from the delegations, Council unanimously supported the Planning Committee’s recommendation to refuse The Hanly Group Inc.’s application for a zoning by-law amendment.
Kimberly De Jong’s reporting is funded by the Canadian government through its Local Journalism Initiative.The funding allows her to report rural and agricultural stories from Blandford-Blenheim and Brant County. Reach her at kimberly.dejong@brantbeacon.ca.
