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

By Mark Newman
Mountain News Aug 08, 2008

When Deanlee Management submits its final draft plan for Chedoke brow land development to the city in the next few weeks it could contain fewer then the 750 units the Mississauga developer had originally proposed.

“It could vary any place from 600 to 750 (units), but we don’t think the 750 is something that we’re going to push simply because I think, given some of the market studies we’ve done, we’ve seen people want larger units,” said Ron Starr, president of development at Deanlee.

After reviewing comments from city planning officials and agencies such as the Niagara Escarpment Commission about the proposal that was given to the city in June 2007, Mr. Starr said Deanlee filed revised conceptual drawings of the proposed development north of Scenic Drive with the city’s planning department about three weeks ago.

Mr. Starr said the company is now in the process of refining those drawings after hearing back from city planners and some agencies and he expects a final draft plan to go to the city in the next few weeks. He’s hoping to get approval from the economic development and planning committee in mid September which would allow the development to go forward.

Deanlee purchased the 9.6 hectare (24 acre) brow lands from the Chedoke Health Corporation in the spring of 2007, with the sale slated to close in December. The developer is also looking to close Sanatorium Road north of Scenic and make it a private condo road.

Under the revamped proposal, Deanlee is looking to build an eight to 10 storey condominium building and a couple of six to eight storey buildings at the centre of the property. The four to six storey condo buildings proposed for the northwest side of the property and on either side of Sanatorium Road just north of Scenic are retained from the earlier proposal.

The two to three storey condo town houses planned along Scenic Drive west of Sanatorium Road have been reworked so it won’t look like row housing.

“It’ll look like a very, very large house, but with multiple units in it,” Mr. Starr said.

In addition, Deanlee is looking to build a three to five storey condo building in front of the wood lot on the east side of the site. The wood lot is expected to be turned over to the city for preservation.

The high end condos are expected to sell for upwards of $300,000.

Mr. Starr said the green space near the centre of the property that includes the storm water management pond will be expanded.

NEC concerns

In a Jan. 7 report responding to the city’s request for comments on the project, the Niagara Escarpment Commission said Deanlee did not submit enough documents to determine whether the development was acceptable under the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act and recommended the city refuse the developer’s application until additional information to satisfy the requirements of the Act were submitted.

NEC planner Martin Kilian said the proposal must comply with section 1.7 of the Act which, in part, the states: “All development should be of an urban design compatible with the visual and natural environment of the Escarpment.”

Essentially, Mr. Kilian said, that means when someone looks up from the base of the Escarpment they will see natural features rather then tall buildings.

Mr. Kilian added the NEC is also concerned that Deanlee is considering too many tall buildings too close to the brow.

“We’re not saying they are, we’re saying they might be,” Mr. Kilian said.

The NEC has asked Deanlee to provide a visual assessment of their proposal. Mr. Starr said that has been done and that report is included as part of the revamped proposal that has been submitted to the city. It will be circulated to commenting agencies such as the NEC.

In its earlier comments the NEC said the 30 meter set-back (from the brow) proposed for the development should be the minimum setback should the existing brow building be demolished.

Mr. Starr feels Deanlee has addressed the NEC’s concerns. He noted the tallest building on the site will be at least 200 metres from the Mountain brow and the brown and green buildings they are planning to build on the property should blend in well with the existing landscape.

“From the ground you can’t see this project,” Mr. Starr said. “With…the visualization and the angle and the right facade treatment, I challenge people once the project is done to find it from many miles out.”

All of the existing buildings on the site, with the exception of the Long and Bisby building, currently home to a day care operation, will be torn down.

Mr. Starr said the Long and Bisby building may be used as a medical clinic in the future.

“We’re exploring all that,” he said.

Deanlee is also looking at possibly saving part of the former continuing care building near the brow which dates back to 1917 and has been empty for more than two years.

The revamped plan is unlikely to get approval from a group of nearby residents who have been adamantly opposed to the project.

“It seems like a bit of a shell game,” said Barry Colbert, a neighbour who feels the developer is just moving units around from one part of the site to another.”I don’t think any of the residents are going to be impressed by that.”

Mr. Colbert is concerned Deanlee’s development will result in more pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the area, adding the move to reduce the number of units from 750 to somewhere around 600 is still no where near what the residents are seeking.

HamiltonMountainNews.com: News: Story: Brow land could see fewer units