A Mississauga firm looking to develop the Chedoke brow lands remains hopeful an alternate plan can be worked out after its proposal was voted down by the city’s economic development and planning committee last week.

“We want to resolve this,” said Michele Starr, president of Deanlee Management Inc., after committee members voted 7-1 on Sept. 21 to refuse the developer’s bid to build as many as 700 townhouse and condo units on the 24-acre site along Sanatorium Road north of Scenic Drive. “Nobody wants to go to the (Ontario Municipal Board).”

City council was expected to reaffirm the denial at last night’s (Wednesday) meeting.

Committee members voted to deny the proposal after hearing from representatives from both sides.

Speaking for brow land area residents opposed to the development, planning consultant Jamie Bennett from the Thornhill-based MMM Group said Deanlee’s proposal is too intense for the site and not consistent with the city’s vision for future growth.

Ward 8 (west Mountain) Coun. Terry Whitehead said $4,800 of Bennett’s $5,000 fee was paid through the portion of his office budget, which provides for the hiring of consultants.

Whitehead said the expenditure was appropriate and approved by city staff.

“Nothing ties my hand from going out and utilizing my budget,” said Whitehead, who noted the consultant was hired in August with approval from the area residents before the city had established its position on the issue.

Under the city’s purchasing policy, expenditures under $5,000 do not require a request for proposals.

While city planning staff have supported Deanlee’s development proposal, Whitehead noted that with city council support Bennett will become the city’s planner of record on the brow lands issue and any future fees will be covered by the city.

The councillor said he’s “cautiously optimistic” an alternative development plan can be worked out between Deanlee, area residents and the city prior to an OMB hearing.

“I know there’s already been calls in from Deanlee to meet and see if they can find a mediated settlement,” Whitehead said.

Deanlee said in June it would take the matter to the OMB after committee members put the issue on hold to allow Whitehead to consult with the neighbours and gather more information on the matter.

Tim McCabe of the city’s planning department said Whitehead hiring a planner is not something that is done very often.

“I think it’s unusual for him to get a peer review of a report that has no council decision at that point,” he said.

The Ontario Municipal Board will ultimately decide if a Mississauga developer can build as many as 700 condominium and town house units on the Chedoke brow lands.

City planner Kirsten McCauley said the city received notice from Deanlee Management earlier this month asking that their proposal be referred to the OMB.

A date has yet to be scheduled for a hearing.

Deanlee president Ron Starr said the company is appealing to the OMB in a bid to move the project forward. “I’ve been trying to work this out for four years and four months,” Starr said.

Under the Planning Act, a developer may appeal to the provincial body if council refuses or neglects to make a decision on their request within a prescribed amount of time depending on the nature of the request and section of the act after receiving the application.

McCauley said the city accepted Deanlee’s applications for development of the 24-acre site along Sanatorium Road, north of Scenic Drive, in the fall of 2007.

At a special meeting of the economic development and planning committee June 10, committee members agreed to put the issue on hold so that brow land area residents opposed to the development can put together an alternative plan that is expected to suggest a less intensive development.

“Most of us within the committee would like to see (the brow lands) as a park, but we know that’s not going to happen,” said Rod Priel, spokesperson for the steering committee the residents organized following last month’s committee meeting.

Priel said the group is in the process of hiring a planning consultant to help them come up with a lower number of units for the brow lands that the OMB will support.

They’re also looking for volunteers and to raise money to pay for a lawyer to represent them at the OMB hearing.

Steering committee member Jim Stewart said he wants to see the natural environment of the brow lands preserved including the 250 or so trees he says he’s counted on the site.

He’s also concerned about how the proposed development will affect local ground water, adding he hasn’t seen any reports addressing that issue.

While city planners are recommending city councillors approve Deanlee’s application, Starr did leave the door open to a possible compromise with the neighbours before the matter goes before the OMB.

“It all depends what the compromise is,” Starr said.

After much perseverance, City Bylaw Enforcement Staff have managed to
cease construction of the temporary parking lot on Scenic Dr. (Chedoke
Site).
I am forwarding a copy of a letter that was sent to our office this
afternoon from Mr. Jim Campbell, General Manager of Columbia
International College.

I trust this information is sufficient and to the satisfaction of the
Mountain Brow Community.

Thank you,

Christine DiGiantomasso,
On behalf of,
Colleen Wicken
Assistant to Councillor Whitehead
Ward 8
(905) 546-2779
Colleen.Wicken@hamilton.ca

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.

This meeting is to be held on Thursday, January 17, 2007 at 6:30pm at the Nash Auditorium, Wilcox Building, Chedoke Hospital Campus.

DATE:

Thursday, December 13, 2007

TIME:
7:00-9:00pm

LOCATION:
Nash Auditorium in the Wilcox Building
Chedoke Hospital Campus

The purpose of Public InformationCentre #4 is to present the first preferred community option and the second preferred community option for the Chedoke Brow Lands as voted by the community. Information on approximate densities and unit projections will be provided for all of the options presented at the last meeting in November. The December meeting will provide an opportunity for the community to view the top two preferred options, provide input and vote between the first preferred option and second preferred option. The final preferred community option will be posted on the City’s brow lands webpage following the meeting.

Nov 16, 2007

Community-generated options range from no development to modest residential housing

Residents living near the Chedoke brow lands have been given five development options for the west Mountain property. The options range from no development to a modest plan for residential housing north of Scenic Drive.

The options were presented to about 100 residents at the third public information centre organized by the city’s planning and economic development department in the Ewart Auditorium at the Chedoke Hospital campus Nov. 13.

Each of the options were presented by members of a citizens sub-committee that was formed last month to mull over and try to find common themes from 12 general development plans that were put together by Chedoke area residents at a public information centre at Mohawk College Oct. 11.

The citizens’ input is being used by city planning officials to develop a modified secondary plan for the area which the residents hope will control the size and scope of future development on the brow lands.

Last spring, Deanlee Management of Mississauga purchased the 9.6 hectare (24 acres) brow lands from the Chedoke Health Corporation and in June submitted a proposal to the city to build 750 high-end condominium units on the site.

It’s expected the city’s economic development and planning committee will consider both the modified secondary plan developed by the residents and Deanlee’s proposal early next spring.

Eric Soberg, who grew up in the area and his mother still lives on Scenic Drive, presented the first option that calls for no development. He urged residents to fight against any development on the property and preserve it for future generations.

“This is a crown piece of property,” Mr. Soberg said. “Chedoke Health Sciences has sold us out as a community.”

The second option calls for limited development, with single detached homes no more than two and a half storeys high on the north-west side of the brow lands and some

similar homes on a pocket of land at the north-west corner of Scenic Drive and Sanatorium Road.

“Everything else we’d like to leave as green space,” said Colleen Morrison, who presented the proposal. “This is what I see as a good option.”

Option three calls for medium-low development with low-rise four storey buildings behind the former continuing care building on the north-west side of the land and a low rise building on the west side of the site near the wood lot and Long and Bisby building.

“We’re looking at development around existing buildings,” said Bart Brosseau, who presented the option.

The plan also calls for two blocks of three storey townhouses on either side of Sanatorium Road just north of Scenic Drive. Green space is proposed along the majority of Scenic as a buffer to the interior development.

Barry Colbert, who presented option five, which calls for mixed-use medium development, noted the property has a healthcare history and he would like to see that maintained in any new development.

“Let’s make this a wellness-themed, mixed use development,” said Mr. Colbert, who noted that could mean a nursing home or some other kinds of wellness facility.

The option calls for four storey terrace buildings near the former continuing care building with wellness services on the ground floor and residential units above. Single homes are proposed along Scenic Drive (west of Sanatorium) with rear access lanes. Townhouses are proposed on either side of Sanatorium north of Scenic and a four storey building is suggested for the middle of the property on the west side of Sanatorium. The Long and Bisby building would be converted for mixed public and residential use.

The fifth option contains the most development of the five proposals.

“The intent here is to provide heavier development within the centre area (of the brow lands),” said presenter John Norris.

The option proposes to retain the former continuing care building and develop six storey (mid rise) terraced residential buildings on the south side of the facility. Parking will be inside the buildings or screened from the roads. A six storey building is proposed near the Long and Bisby building with two low rise (three and four storey) buildings on either side of Sanatorium, north of Scenic. A row of townhouses facing Scenic with rear lane access are proposed for the west side of the site.

“It allows us to get as much green space as possible,” said Mr. Norris, who estimated the plan could include as many as 400 units, 350 less than Deanlee’s proposal.

Mr. Norris said he believes the option is defendable should the developer take the matter to the Ontario Municipal Board.

After the proposals were presented, the residents voted for their first and second preferred options.

City senior project manager Brenda Khes said Chedoke neighbours who were unable to attend the meeting can vote on-line until Dec. 3.

Several residents complained it was difficult to pick an option because the proposals did not come with a number of units attached.

“We don’t have a unit count on them yet because there’s a lot of work that has to be done to figure out units,” Ms. Khes said.

Ms. Khes said planning staff will tally the votes and bring back the community’s preferred option to the next public information centre on Dec. 13. At that time planning staff will also have an estimated number of units for each option.

“If the votes are really close, then we have to decide whether or not are we going to combine the two types of options or are we going to come back with two preferred options,” Ms. Khes said.

Residents will have one final chance to comment on and make adjustments to the preferred option next month before it is incorporated into the modified secondary plan and sent to the councillors.

Ms. Khes said a final meeting may be required in January to complete the process.

She told the residents the time and effort they’ve spent on the secondary planning process will carry have a lot of weight before city council and the OMB.

The purpose of Public Information Centre #3 is to present various options for the community?s vision for the Chedoke Brow Lands. These options have been developed from the input/ideas provided at the last meeting, through review of the plans and comment sheets and through the assistance of the volunteer sub-committee. Common themes have been identified and incorporated into the community options for the Brow Lands. City staff, with the assistance of sub-committee representatives, will present the different development options to the group.

Following the presentation, individuals will be given the opportunity to vote on their 1st Preferred Option and their 2nd Preferred Option for the Chedoke Brow Lands. Staff will total the votes and present the preferred community option for community review at the final Public Information Centre on December 13, 2007.

Click here for a map of the Chedoke Hospital Campus

One of the few remaining open spaces on the west Mountain with a scenic view of the lower city is slated for development, upsetting neighbours who don’t want to lose the view or the peacefulness of the area.

The residents are trying to preserve as much as they can with a campaign to keep Scenic Drive scenic, by working on alternatives to 750 condominium homes, some in highrises, planned for the old Chedoke hospital site.

Ward Councillor Terry Whitehead calls the Chedoke brow lands the last bastion of green space on the Mountain and likens its high heritage value to that of the city’s beachfront.

“A lot of people want to protect Scenic Drive,” he says.

The size of the development on the 9.6-hectare property will add at least 1,500 people, assuming two per household, to the already congested rush-hour traffic on the west Mountain, residents say. The site is an expansive property with a handful of heritage buildings and large open green spaces and trees. Hamilton Health Sciences, which took over the Chedoke site, is selling it to developer Deanlee Management Inc. of Mississauga. The deal is expected to close in December 2008.

Following the initial residents’ outcry, Deanlee reduced its original plans for 900 units to 750 and reduced its 12- to 14-storey highrises to eight storeys. The proposal is for three-storey and four-storey townhouses, four- to six-, and now eight-storey condominium buildings. The units are selling for about $300,000 each.

The area’s current dwellings are mostly single family homes.

The city, at Whitehead’s request, has started a secondary planning process so the residents can present alternatives to the development — one that avoids highrises, reduces the number of homes and preserves mature trees.

“I think 200 is reasonable,” says resident Barry Colbert, who lives beside the site. “It’s the last good-size piece of land left on the brow,” he says.

Colbert says the traffic generated otherwise will overburden area streets. Traffic near the Queen Street hill down to the lower city is already paralyzed whenever there’s a minor accident.

It is an example of the difficulty in balancing a community’s character with provincial policies steering development to already urbanized areas.

The residents will present their alternative plan at a public meeting Nov. 13.

TheSpec.com – Local – Keep it scenic, Mountain residents tell condominium developer

The location of the 24 hour assessment was Scenic Drive and Angela Street. This location is more or less across the street from the Chedoke Browland scheduled to be developed. Keep in mind that this assessment has been taken during summer months, when many people whom use Scenic are on vacation, etc and while many students with cars, are not racing back and forth to schools, colleges and universities.

During this period, there were 4,499 vehicles that went by. I have attached the following 2 pdf files: 1. The “Traffic Volume Information” and 2. The “Vehicle Classification” information.

For those of you that do not live in the area, it may be hard to comprehend the traffic chaos we currently experience on the west mountain (even worse during the regular school year). The west mountain cannot accommodate density intensification (especially the downbound and upbound mountain access traffic).

To add to Scenic’s intensification, rumour has it that Columbia College is proposing to build an additional dorm on their current site. This again will cause additional traffic concerns in the area (ie. students needing to get bused – down the mountain – to Columbia College campus).

Scenic Drive/West Mountain residents have recently been exposed to the following increased traffic, density infill/intensification:

1. The new Residential area in and around Chedoke hospital.

2. St. Peters Hospital

3. There is rumour that there will be more residential infill in the area by St. Peters

4. Chedoke Arena

and then add

5. In addition to another dorm for Columbia College students.

and

6. Proposed development of the Chedoke Browland site.

When will it end? The proposed Chedoke Brow Land development is just another nail in the coffin.

While I respect the opinions of those that are in favour of the development, I wonder how many of them actually travel in this area during peak periods. If they do, I certainly hope that they are not the individuals using Scenic Drive as their own personal Nascar racetrack. I do not mean to offend individuals, but West Mountain residents have rights too.

Please take the time to look at the attached pdf files for your information. You will probably be surprised.

1. traffic-assessment-results-dated-july-11-2007.pdf

2. vehicle-classification.pdf