<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Chedoke BrowLands Community &#187; development proposal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chedokebrow.ca/tag/development-proposal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chedokebrow.ca</link>
	<description>Chedoke community on Proposed Brow Development - Lets Keep It Scenic!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 03:24:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Chedoke Browlands development proposal not carved in stone</title>
		<link>http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-browlands-development-proposal/</link>
		<comments>http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-browlands-development-proposal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:31:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tech</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mountain News Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[browland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chedoke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condominium units]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[developers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development proposal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flexibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hamilton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lands]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[luxury penthouse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mississauga]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mountain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mountain news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mr starr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neighbour]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neighbours]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parkland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[return on investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ron starr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sanatorium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scenic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[single family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[townhouses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chedokebrow.ca/february-1-2008-mountain-news-article/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[n December, as part of the secondary planning process for the brow lands along Sanatorium Road, north of Scenic Drive, the majority of residents living near the site voted for either limited development that would see 25 single family homes on the brow lands or no development at all.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #404040;">The following article was posted in the February 1, 2008 Mountain News.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">Firstly, I would like to advise the community of some FACTS:</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="color: #404040;">1. Deanlee is paying 5 millions for this property&#8230;I think that&#8217;s a steal</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">and a profit margin would be easily obtainable.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">2. We have submitted a pettition to the City with approximately 600</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">names against this type of development. (note that these are</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">voting individuals in the community).</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">3. The community voted for the type of development they could live with,</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">The vote overwhelmingly opted for the single family homes. <a class="posts" href="http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-brow-results-are-in/">The</a></span></p>
<p><a class="posts" href="http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-brow-results-are-in/"></a><a href="http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-brow-results-are-in/">stats are posted on our site</a><a href="http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-brow-results-are-in/"> for your information.</a></p></blockquote>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">In my opinion, the above outweighs the 14 individuals that have</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #404040;">expressed their interest in the type of units Deanlee is proposing.</span></p>
<blockquote><p>____________________________________________________</p>
<p><strong>Brow lands development proposal not carved in stone</strong></p>
<p><script type="text/javascript"><!--</p>
<p>document.title= "HamiltonMountainNews.com: Article: Brow lands development proposal not carved in stone";
// --></script></p>
<p><strong>Developer willing to look at fewer units if return on investment not compromised</strong></p>
<p><em>By Mark Newman</em></p>
<p>News</p>
<p><strong>Feb 01, 2008</strong><strong> </strong></p></blockquote>
<p>Deanlee Management is willing to look at fewer then the 750 units it has proposed for the Chedoke brow lands.</p>
<p>&#8220;It&#8217;s not carved in stone,&#8221; said Ron Starr, president of development at the Mississauga firm. &#8220;There&#8217;s flexibility in this process.&#8221;</p>
<p>Possible ways of reducing the number of units Mr. Starr offered, could include increasing the size of the single family homes, townhouses and condominium units proposed for the the site thereby requiring fewer of them or by adding luxury penthouse condos to the top of some of the proposed buildings, which would also reduce the total number of units.</p>
<p>Mr. Starr said Deanlee is willing to look at fewer units on the site if they can be shown to be financially viable for the company and there is planning support and justification for the change.</p>
<p>&#8220;Show us a solution,&#8221; Mr. Starr said. &#8220;We still haven&#8217;t seen any (alternative), we&#8217;re either had no development or limited development and we knew that from day one.&#8221;</p>
<p>In December, as part of the secondary planning process for the brow lands along Sanatorium Road, north of Scenic Drive, the majority of residents living near the site voted for either limited development that would see 25 single family homes on the brow lands or no development at all.</p>
<p>Mr. Starr said those two options are non-starters.</p>
<p>&#8220;It&#8217;s not even reasonable,&#8221; said Mr. Starr, who added Deanlee has been prepared since &#8220;day one&#8221; to go to the Ontario Municipal Board to seek approval for the project if a development agreement with the city and the neighbours cannot be worked out.</p>
<p>&#8220;I think the residents truly believe what they&#8217;re doing is the right thing, but I think they&#8217;re missing the opportunity to really come back to the owners (and) developers of the land to say this is what we&#8217;ll live with,&#8221; Mr. Starr said. &#8220;If somebody can give us some good ideas and there&#8217;s the ability to compromise and utilize the lands as we as builders think is a good compromise, we&#8217;re quite willing to listen.&#8221;</p>
<p>Mr. Starr estimated Deanlee will spend as much as $250 million on labour, materials and other costs to develop the brow lands. He expects most of builders and sub contractors they use will be from the Hamilton area.</p>
<p>&#8220;You utilize as many local people as you can because it&#8217;s cost-efficient,&#8221; Mr. Starr said.</p>
<p>In addition, Mr. Starr said the company expects to pay as much as $20 million in development charges and about $3 million a year in property taxes.</p>
<p>Mr. Starr said not all of the neighbours in the area oppose the development plans, noting Deanlee has received requests from as many as 14 people who live within &#8220;walking distance&#8221; of the brow lands to be put on a reservation list for the condos.</p>
<p>City planning staff are reviewing Deanlee&#8217;s proposal as well as information gathered from the residents during the secondary planning process and are expected to make their recommendation to the economic and planning committee in March or April.</p>
<p>On Jan. 17, Deanlee officials took a group of city planning staff and brow lands area residents on a bus tour of some developments in Toronto, Oakville and Burlington to give them an idea of the kind of buildings and surrounding landscaping they hope to construct and how some residential development has been merged with open space.</p>
<p>&#8220;I think some of the examples they showed us were very positive,&#8221; said John Norris, a brow land area resident and member of the group Mountainview Residents for Recreation of Hamilton.</p>
<p>Mr. Norris said the non-profit group is pushing Deanlee and the city to maintain as much open space on the brow lands as possible.</p>
<p>Their proposals include: preserving the east side of the development at Scenic Drive and Sanatorium Road (a former baseball field) as parkland; installing a set of stairs from in front of the Long and Bisby building to the rail trail below and improving pathways around the water retention pond area in the centre of the brow lands to make it a more scenic walking corridor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-browlands-development-proposal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chedoke Area Residents Voted for Limited Development</title>
		<link>http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-area-residents-voted-for-limited-development/</link>
		<comments>http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-area-residents-voted-for-limited-development/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:18:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tech</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mountain News Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apartment units]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chedoke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[city planners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condominium units]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[councillor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[developers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development option]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development proposal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[information centres]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lands]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mississauga]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public information centre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sanatorium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sanatorium road]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scenic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scenic drive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stark contrast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[townhouses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[traffic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-area-residents-voted-for-limited-development/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[residents living near Chedoke hospital get their way, development of the brow lands will see only 25 single detached homes erected on the west-side of Sanatorium Road north of Scenic Drive.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p id="article_content" class="BodyLineup">By Mark Newman, January 11, 2008</p>
<p class="BodyLineup">Public input will be considered as city planners grapple with development proposal for area north of Scenic Drive</p>
<p>If residents living near Chedoke hospital get their way, development of the brow lands will see only 25 single detached homes erected on the west-side of Sanatorium Road north of Scenic Drive.<br />
The limited development option (option number two) was the overwhelming favourite of residents who voted at a Dec. 13 public information centre at the Nash auditorium or online prior to midnight Dec. 31.</p>
<p>Of the 224 votes cast by the deadline, option number two garnered 120 votes (104 by e-mail). Option number one &#8211; no development &#8211; drew 62 votes (57 by e-mail); option 3a &#8211; medium-low development with 234 townhouse and apartment units &#8211; received 10 votes (one by e-mail); option 3b &#8211; medium-low development with 122 townhouse and apartment units in new and existing buildings &#8211; received 14 votes (10 by e-mail); option four &#8211; mixed use medium development with 256 units, mostly apartments and townhouses and a few single family homes &#8211; got 12 votes (three by e-mail) and option five &#8211; the most development with 469 units comprised mostly of apartments and some townhouses &#8211; drew six votes (four by e-mail).</p>
<p>The unit numbers for each option are estimates provided by city planning staff as part of the modified secondary planning work for the brow lands that began with the first of four public information centres last September. Chedoke area residents are hoping the secondary plan will control the size and scope of future development on the brow lands.</p>
<p>The residents&#8217; preferred option is in stark contrast to the plan Deanlee Management of Mississauga filed with the city last June.</p>
<p>Deanlee, who purchased the 9.6 hectare (24 acre) brow lands from the Chedoke Health Corporation last spring, is looking to build 750 high-end condominium units on the site. The developer is also looking to close Sanatorium Road north of Scenic and make it a private condo road. The road closure process is expected to go through the public process in the coming months.</p>
<p>Planning staff are now pouring over Deanlee&#8217;s proposal, which includes a number of reports and studies including a planning justification report, environmental impact statement, heritage assessment, archeological assessment and a traffic study.</p>
<p>The city&#8217;s economic development and planning committee will consider both the modified secondary plan developed by the residents and Deanlee&#8217;s proposal in March or April.</p>
<p>City senior planner Brenda Khes said planning staff will consider the public input as part of the review process. Planning staff also have the option of recommending to the councillors an option that incorporates some aspects of both proposals.</p>
<p>Deanlee had planned to hold a public open house about the proposed development January 17, but company director Ron Starr said they had to cancel the meeting because they need time to review comments from a number of local groups and agencies that have come into the city&#8217;s planning department. Mr. Starr said a public open house will be rescheduled in the next few weeks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chedokebrow.ca/chedoke-area-residents-voted-for-limited-development/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: chedokebrow.ca @ 2012-02-09 14:53:50 by W3 Total Cache -->
