Comments on: Niagara Escarpment Commission Decision Made – Closing Mackie’s Mountain Archery

By: ewa

ewa — Wed, 20 May 2009 02:31:36 +0000

The propery in question here is now for sale…is anywone aware whether the previous land use isseus would affect the new owner? Has it been resolved?

By: smitty

smitty — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 05:30:43 +0000

Not sure who is looking after this site or where to comment but as a resident for over 20 years, I was getting a little concerned where we and this proposed development are going. My wife went to a open house early in the year and one of these recent plan meetings.Finally sat down last night for two hours to go through all the comments and opinions on this site and the others eg Hamiltonians /etc and others. Didn’t realize what a diverse range of good and bad ideas. Also went through a ton of stuff on the Planning Departments site explaining where both the City and Provincial Policies are directing the whole process. Let me commend the group organizers on trying to keep us informed but as one who wanted to keep an open mind, I don’t think we have all the pertinent information in front of us. I asked my next door neighbour how the real planning concerns were being addressed and the answer was to the effect that ,, they don’t matter , we just don’t want any development, only a park. My sister went through a similar exercise in Oakville and they totally lost at the omb.The omb doesn’t care about petitions ; just planning facts.
My real concern is that we grasping at straws, eg the 1932 land purchase conditions, which wasn’t explained as only affecting one acre and when I asked my lawyer about this, he told me ,, not a hope in h—. Also , someone questions the purchasers abilities ? Another straw. If someone has 10 million $$ up front, I’m sure they have some serious partners and how are we to judge ? The driving group behind the opposition to building are maybe 100 or 200 people,, How about the silent majority who, as you get blocks away from the new proposals, do they really care ?
Lastly after due consideration and all my recent reading, we all have to worry about the future of our kids, the additional people growth in Hamilton and the need to intensify. Growth is going to happen in south Ontario and I for one want to be a positive voice. If you have an ad-hoc committee, can I attend ? I may not agree totally but we should all have the right to free opinions. I am prepared to donate a few dollars to a good approach but I am not convinced we are doing it the right way yet.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:52:12 +0000

Thanks for your response.

For your information, I am quite familiar with the portion of Scenic Drive on the west mountain that you’re attempting to save. I used to live on West 32nd for quite a number of years (Chedoke Public School grade 4 to Westmount High School grade 13, plus more years before I married and moved on). I often took the trail from Scenic Drive through the woods that led past the Hospital Nurses Residence and to the Brow Infirmary. The steps leading to the Chedoke Golf Course Club House were well used by young kids like myself who were seeking “life” beyond our immediate neighborhood.

Similiar to our situation with Mackies Archery, you are attempting to save what we have of our environment, without having it become a commercial identity or a residential complex. Logic asks us “why should we travel to the “north” when we have enjoyments of nature right here”. Or, “why can’t development be controlled for the benefit preserving our environment?”

It’s been good “talking” with you; be encouraged, keep up your fight.

By: Colleen

Colleen — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 02:57:11 +0000

Surround.
I read your suggested material with interest. I will admit that I was not fully aware of the other land owners issues. However, having said that my intent was to point out that the Niagara Escarpment Commission is making decisions on land that is other than what neighbours on the West Mountain are being told they have authority over. We would like them to make a ruling favouring that the land that development is being proposed for was not in keeping with the neighbourhood. A parcel of the land is deemed “Sensitive Area”. In addition, there was a covenant on another portion of the land that stipulated “single family homes and/or park land”. This covenant was older than 40 years and therefore it seems it just got written off. (Remind me never to donate to the Chedoke Foundation/Hamilton Health Sciences, or any foundation for that matter. I would fear that my donation would not be kept in the spirit in which it was given).
Thanks for your comments and enlightening me. Sometimes we can’t see the forest for the trees. But where is the Niagara Escarpment Commission when it comes to our issue – “Let’s Keep it Scenic”.

By: Surrounded

Surrounded — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:30:34 +0000

I would recommend that you get all the facts before being led astray by a two minute newsclip on CHCH news.

First, we need to remember that “news media” only present enough information to raise their ratings. The truth is often hidden for the sake of $$’s into their coffers, which is more important to them than true investigative reporting, where presenting the the public with both sides of the story used to be normal.

Secondly, search Goggle for “Mackie”, 06-113 for the 20 page pdf document from the Environmental Review Tribunal Hearing Decision of January 22/2007. http://www.ert.gov.on.ca/Decisions/06113d1.pdf

You’re continued opinion would be welcomed; after you become more aware of the background facts.