Comments on: Bad Intensification

By: George

George — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 21:37:15 +0000

I am against development. Why does everything we build have to generate money. Is Hamilton in some kind of bind? Even considering we have the 5th highest tax rates in Canada?

I would sway my vote if the city actually took the environment seriously; not just using the term ‘environment’ to gain public support. Taking the environment seriously would mean building for a cause other than monetary gains. I am pessimistic that this is possible. Therefore, lets just keep it scenic.

By: Libra64

Libra64 — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 23:19:12 +0000

darlene..
were you at any of the general meetings put on by Chedoke Hospital a couple of years back? I was ! and sadly, very few area residents attended. I clearly heard there was to be residential building and it was to be probably a lot denser than the current area.
I am miffed that the City didn’t buy this unique property but apparentlly we have too much parkland now and the City did not see this property as a priority, probably no money either.So lets move on.
I am one of the quiet majority who was rather neutral on this matter until one of my neighbours suggest I buy a sign. I didn’t but what I did do to to review this websites data and also the volumes of materials the City has posted> I didn’t realize the City has intensification policies as does the Province of Ontario. This will not be ignored by the developer, How do we handle this ?
The traffic issue is of concern but gridlock is rampant in southern Ontario . I know, I put on over 59,000 Km a year in my job inthe great horseshoe area.How many of us on the Mountain use public transport ?
Until we come up with a solution : an overall answer to intensification, gridlock, green built development, econimic benefits and the right of the Health Sciences group to raise money to sell excess land, we truly don’t have a right to “Just say no ”
Are the residents aware the Hospital owned all the land at one time ; where we all live and will be auctioning mor in the future ?
I am trying to be realistic and yes, I voted on this website , but for someti\hing other than , NO development. If we are going to get a more intense build style, then I would suggest architectural controls, types of materials, not cheap townhosing, control of the forest area and public access along the brow. and what about the daycare bulding? who will end up owning that?
And finally we or the committe or someone has to meet with the bilder to see if there are any happy mediums Thats a 34th st opinion

By: D. McIlveen

D. McIlveen — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 23:46:51 +0000

Mr Ted Mitchell:

I am in opposition to the development of the Chedoke Browlands. I attended several community meetins where the stewarts of these lands promised that existing city zoning codes would protect the lands from development, and that any development could not exceed the existing three story Chedoke Continuing Care structure, or its land base. (The developer was in attendance for at least one of these meetings.)

Subsequent community meetings presented information that The City of Hamilton had Provincial “Intensification” obligations, thus our city representatives could not represent the needs of the area.

I do not own a “monster home.” I do, however, believe in the individual’s responsibility to invest in older communities rather than the “build it new, build it big, on undeveloped land” school of thought. My home does not have the modern conviences, or square footage, of these newer homes, but I believe that the West Mountain has lost too much land to housing and commercial developments.

The residents of this community have been responsive to the needs of the greater Hamilton area. This is not a NIMBY attitude. Chedoke, through amalgamation with McMaster Hospital (now Hamilton Health Sciences), lost its emergency care services. These lands are now funding alternative Health Care facilities in the city through the development of the Columbia residences (and expansion), residential condo units and housing, St. Peter’s Long Term Care Residence, Chedoke Arena, Idlewyld Manor, etc.

As well, anyone in this area who has tried to get to work down the Mountain accesses knows that this area is not commuter-friendly, and cannot handle the proposed population and subsequent traffic increases.

These browlands should be protected from development; and the City of Hamilton’s excuse of “Intensification obligations” means the loss of a unique heritage.