Active, wealthy retirees who don’t want to do much cooking are part of the focus in the final plans for development of Chedoke brow lands that were submitted to the city late last month

“We are looking at an adult lifestyle community, which basically means retirement (living),” said Ron Starr, president of development at Deanlee Management.

The Mississauga developer purchased the 9.6 hectare (24 acres) brow lands along Sanatorium Road north of Scenic Drive from the Chedoke Health Corporation nearly three years ago and has been working on their development plans since then.

Starr said Deanlee has teamed up with Origin Evergreen, a company that specializes in building communities for active retirees.

“It’s a change recognizing that the demographics are changing in North America,” said Starr, who noted as many as half of the approximately 650 available condominium and townhouse units they are looking to build will be aimed at retirees, with prices starting at about $250,000 and up.

The new proposal, now being reviewed by city planners, is slightly smaller than the original plan, about 800,000 square feet compared to one million square feet previously and about 100 fewer units. It includes 11 buildings.

About 80 three-storey townhouse units are to be built in three blocks on the northwest side along Scenic Drive.

Next to the townhouses will be a cluster of four two- to five-storey buildings with smaller condos geared to retirees complete with dining, exercise and activity areas.

Three eight-storey buildings are planned for the area near Sanatorium and Scenic — two on the east side of Sanatorium and one on the west side.
The tallest proposed building is 10 storeys, located close to the middle of the site on the east side of Sanatorium.

Niagara Escarpment Commission officials had raised concerns about the vista along the edge of the escarpment being disturbed by the project. Starr noted they’ve had three visualization studies done and none of the buildings will be seen from as far as six kilometres back from the base of the escarpment.

“We think we have met the (NEC) requirements,” said Starr.

He said the project will add as much as $20 million in development fees to city coffers and about $3 million annually in taxes.

All the of the existing buildings on the site, with the exception of the Long and Bisby building, will be torn down as part of the development.

Starr said his company looked at saving part of the two-storey brow building, or East Pavilion, that dates back to 1917, but it’s not possible.

“We were just in there (last week) with an expert and it doesn’t look like it’s feasible,” he said.

The large wood lot on the east side of the site, which has been deemed an environmentally sensitive area where development is prohibited, will remain with the condo corporation that manages the new community.

Public foot and bicycle access will continue along the lip of the escarpment from the west side as that strip of land remains city property.
Many neighbours in the area have objected to development saying it will add a lot more traffic the area.

Barry Colbert, who lives near the brow lands, said he has concerns about adding another 1,500 residents to the area.

He supports a mix of development and green space for the brow lands and wants to see how the new development will function as a community before he can say if he supports the plan or opposes it.

“How integrated is it as a community?” he questioned.

“I would like to see something happening there, it’s getting run-down.”

Starr called the plan a good compromise for the community, noting the development will also feature a shared car program so all of the residents won’t necessarily need to have a vehicle.

Most of the parking on the site will be underground, Starr said.

Brenda Khes, senior project manager with the city’s planning division, said staff is reviewing the proposal and it’s too early to determine whether they will recommend the project to members of economic development and planning committee.

Khes said the proposal will likely go before the committee early in the New Year.

Starr said he feels Deanlee had addressed all of the planning department’s concerns and hopes city planners will recommend the proposal to the councillors.

“There’s been significant changes and compromises on our behalf,” he said.

“We certainly don’t want to go to the (Ontario Municipal Board).”
If approved by city council early next year, construction on phase one of the project on the west side of the site could begin in the spring with occupancy by the end of 2011.

Starr said Deanlee is also considering a residential development in downtown Hamilton in the future.

Residents gearing up for OMB fight with developers over plans for Niagara Escarpment in Pleasant View

BY ERIC MCGUINNESS
Hamilton Spectator

DUNDAS ? Liberal cabinet minister Ted McMeekin says there’s no way a 760-unit retirement community will ever be built in rural Pleasant View neighbourhood at the foot of the Niagara Escarpment.

“That development will not go ahead,” he declared in a telephone interview Friday. “It’s contrary to the Parkway Belt Plan, previous OMB (Ontario Municipal Board) decisions, the city’s official plan, provincial interests and what the Niagara Escarpment Commission (NEC) wants to do.”

McMeekin said he told planner Ed Fothergill, who represents three corporate owners of the 80hectare site: “There’s no friggin’ way it’s going ahead.”

He told The Spectator: “Their chances are up there with the (Toronto Maple) Leafs’ chances of winning four consecutive games in regulation time this season.”

Neither Fothergill nor the owners’ lawyer could be reached for comment.

The statement by McMeekin, Minister of Consumer Services and MPP for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale, comes as the Ontario legislature considers Bill 212 that would allow cabinet to expand the Niagara Escarpment Planning Area without passing a new law each time.

The NEC, which has asked that Pleasant View be transferred to its jurisdiction from the old Parkway Belt plan, expects cabinet to move quickly once the bill gets royal assent, expected early next year.

“That’s fantastic news,” said Kris Robinson, a member of the Pleasant View Ratepayers Association.

Dundas Councillor Russ Powers said: “The legislation may prohibit any development in that area.”

Until the bill is passed – assuming it does – the association has to gear up to fight the developers, who are appealing sections of Hamilton’s new rural official plan to the Ontario Municipal Board, which will open a preliminary hearing Dec. 1.

Association members are angry they have to go back to the OMB, which ruled in 1995 that new homes in the area require lots of at least 10 hectares.

Ratepayers’ president Don Char-long is urging interested citizens to register to take part in the hearing. His number is 905-308-2684.

McMeekin said Bill 212 will also lead to other former Parkway Belt lands in Hamilton and Halton being added to the escarpment planning area. “This is something I’ve been on for well over a year, working with councillors Powers and Brian McHattie, who spearheaded a request from the city to transfer authority for Pleasant View to the NEC. Natural Resources Minister Donna Cansfield tells me it can be done just by regulation once the bill passes.”

emcguinness@thespec.com 905-526-4650

Chris Erl, Hamilton Mountain

Letters To The Editor – Mountain News
Nov 20, 2009
Re: Chedoke brow lands plan targets retirees (Nov. 13)

It seems to be a pattern in Hamilton whereby a problem arises, a mediocre plan is developed and neither side in the dispute is at all satisfied with the outcome

This pattern is soon to repeat itself with the “re-development” of the Chedoke brow lands.

Deanlee Management has submitted an official proposal to the city’s planning department that would see another exclusive, destructive and unsustainable development scar the face of our community, already in desperate need of a new attitude.

The units in this sprawling new development along the escarpment will start at $250,000, well out of the reach of a vast majority of the seniors in Hamilton.

Over 25 per cent of local senior citizens live in poverty, while countless others have trouble getting by on their dwindling pensions.

In a time of economic hardship, it is insulting to the people of this city to claim a new housing project will be “targeted to retirees” when, in reality, it fails to even make the appearance of inclusiveness.

Furthermore, this development will be ruthlessly destructive, carving through our community without regard for local heritage.

Deanlee’s plan will demolish the 92-year-old East Pavilion that was used to help rehabilitate soldiers returning home from the First World War.

Truly one of the saddest things about Hamilton is our seeming lack of respect for heritage buildings, especially ones with vibrant and often hidden histories such as this structure.

To destroy the East Pavilion would be removing it from our landscape and from countless generations to come that could have learned about their city’s magnificent past through it.

To simply add to the obvious problems with this development is the fact that it is single-use, adding nothing but extra traffic to an area already plagued by congestion.

No shops, theaters, parks, recreational facilities or institutional buildings such as churches and community centers will be part of this plan, and the addition of 1500 new residents will simply increase demand for all these services.

This entire development shows the same lack of foresight that has seen the rising prevalence of poorly accessible power centers fill the void in the community for desired services.

I strongly urge the planning department to study these facts and reject this proposal.

The expected $3 million in tax revenue will be eaten up in road maintenance, snow clearing and extra services the rapid influx of new residents will require.

The heritage of the area will be compromised, the exclusive nature of this program is appalling and the unsustainable development style will cause major problems.

If the planning department approves this proposal, I urge councillors to vote against it. If council accepts this plan, I urge the taxpayers of this city to show their disapproval to Deanlee Development, the city planning department and city council.

It’s not too late to save our community from another disastrous development.

Chris Erl, Hamilton Mountain

In 2007, Deanlee Management Inc. submitted applications to amend the City of Hamilton Official Plan and Zoning By-law and submitted a draft plan of subdivision for a property located on the brow of the Niagara Escarpment at the intersection of Sanatorium Drive and Scenic Drive. The proposed development sited in the NEP’s Urban Area has evolved since the original application in response to feedback from the City, NEC staff and other agencies. The proposal now includes the following:

· 81,000 square metres of gross floor area and 725 residential apartment units

· some limited commercial or other non-residential uses

· conversion of Sanatorium Drive to a private road

· retention of two heritage buildings

· preservation of a 2 hectare woodlot

· the extension of a trail along the Escarpment brow

· minimum 30 metre setback of any buildings from the Escarpment brow

· minimum of 30% landscaped open space throughout the site

· creation of two stormwater detention ponds in the centre of the site, and creation of a traffic circle at the southern intersection of the two roads.

NEC staff have provided several comments to the City on this development and our latest set of comments, and the Demonstration Master Plan dated February 3, 2009 are attached. We are providing them to the Commission at this time as there is some expectation on the part of the applicant that the City could make a decision on the applications in May.

At the time of writing, NEC staff have not reviewed the final text of the Official Plan amendment, zoning by-law or conditions of draft approval but based on the discussion with the applicant and City staff at a meeting held on March 9, we can provide the Commission with information on the intent for the site based on the draft documents that we have reviewed. Further comments will be provided to the City and the Commission will be advised of the staff position, if the development changes subsequent to our report.

The key issues for NEC staff have been the visual impact on the Escarpment, building heights, protection of the woodlot and the preservation of open space within the site to maintain the character of the Escarpment Urban designation and links to the Escarpment.

Based on the staff evaluation of the Visual Impact Assessment Supplementary Report, dated February 2, 2009 prepared by Siteline Research on behalf of the applicant, there could be a visual impact from the proposed 10 storey building on Block 9 when viewed from the King Road perspective. In discussions with the applicant, they are now considering lowering this particular building by 2 storeys which could resolve the visual impact. We have requested a final consolidated Visual Impact Assessment and the incorporation of the recommendations of the study in the Official Plan policies. These recommendations relate to building roof details, building colour, fenestration and lighting; all designed to minimise the impact of the buildings on the Escarpment.

In order to allow views through the site from the south, NEC staff recommended that adequate setbacks between the proposed 6-8 storey buildings on the east and west side of Sanatorium Drive at Scenic Drive be established in the zoning bylaw. The applicant’s planner suggested a 30 metre setback in this location and this is satisfactory.

Opposite San Pedro Drive on the subject lands is a grassed and treed area through which Chedoke Creek passes. It is proposed that some of this area would be preserved and two dry storm water management ponds would be created. The precise extent of this area is still under discussion as the Sanatorium Road Flood and Erosion Impact Study for the larger surrounding area is not yet complete. However, in discussions with the applicant, they intend to preserve a 15 metre buffer on either side of the creek at the request of the Hamilton Conservation Authority through the zoning bylaw which will be of assistance in preserving views through the site and maintain a park-like setting. The preservation of a component of the open park-like setting to balance the built form is an important factor in mitigating the visual impact of medium density development within this Escarpment Urban Area. The 15 metre setback along the Chedoke Creek centreline is not considered sufficient to provide this balance. The provision of a wide opening with views into a central contiguous open space area, consistent with the Demonstration Master Plan provided by the proponent, is a matter that continues to be discussed. We have also raised a concern with the City as to whether the proposed 30% landscaped open space will be achieved on the site. This issue remains pending until the applicant produces a scaled drawing of the development concept.

An existing 2.7 hectare woodlot on the north east portion of the site will be protected but will remain as private property. A ten metre setback around the woodlot will be established to protect the edge of the woodlot during construction.

Underground parking is proposed for this development. In order to excavate, some blasting will be necessary. The applicant advised that a further report on blasting is being prepared and the NEC will be provided with a copy. If the report demonstrates that underground parking is not feasible, then the overall density of the development would be reduced.

Once the City has made a decision on the applications, and assuming the applications are approved, this applicant will likely sell the property to others for development and applications for draft plan of condominium and site plan approval will be submitted. We believe the City will continue to keep us involved in the consultation process and will circulate these applications to us for comment. It will be important to ensure that the new owners of the property understand the importance of requirements of the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the urban design guidelines so that the final form of the development incorporates the principles that we have conveyed to the City with respect to the open landscape character of the site and the importance of adhering to the recommendations of the Visual Impact Assessment.

Click here to download the pdf file, if the adobe application fails.