[LikeHamilton]

Ancaster's 'unique' community under attack: councillor

High density developments viewed as a threat to community heritage

Kevin Werner Mar 07, 2008 Ancaster News.com

Ancaster's way of life is under attack from Hamilton development, says councillor Lloyd Ferguson.

And if nothing is done to preserve its "unique" community, said the first-term councillor, the third oldest Ontario community will likely disappear.

"Ancaster is special," said Mr. Ferguson. "We need to preserve our heritage. We have a duty to preserve it."

The latest "threat" to Ancaster's lifestyle is a residential development council and staff approved last week to be constructed at 591 Garner Road West. Mr. Ferguson strongly opposed the plan.

The development, proposed by Monterey Heights Development Corp, received a number of planning exemptions that Mr. Ferguson stridently fought against.

For instance, the developers asked for and received an exemption to Hamilton's Official Plan to increase the density from 62 residential dwellings per hectare to 105 dwellings, an agreement that Mr. Ferguson said will "lead residents to revolt again."

The development involves constructing one 3.5-storey apartment building, and two 4.5-storey apartments, for a total of 153 residential units on the property. The buildings will exceed the former town's 3-storey height restrictions.

City planning staff stated the higher buildings were justified so that "residential intensification can be achieved with a smaller footprint."

Mr. Ferguson was also irritated that since the residential development is categorized as "adult-oriented" with one and two-bedroom units, city staff agreed to exempt the developers from constructing a play area for children.

An additional problem is the limited number of parking spaces for residents. So far there are about 293 parking spaces planned, but the development, according to planning staff, needs about 322 parking spots. The developer agreed to provide two parking spaces per unit, while reducing the number of visitor parking spots available. The developer had originally wanted 1.9 spaces from the 2.33 spaces required.

Mr. Ferguson said the limited number of parking areas, plus the fact there is no sidewalks along Garner Road West will mean parking will be at a premium in the surrounding neighbourhood.

"People will be parking in the church (next door to the development)," said Mr. Ferguson.

"We shouldn't be supporting this," he insisted.

The Monterey Heights residential plan is only the latest development that has Ancaster residents afraid their town is slowly being consumed.

Other developments that are expected to further change the surrounding environment and squeeze the community's available services, clog roads, and eat up parking spots are Mount Mary's 127-unit development, Wilson Street's 62-unit condominium project, the recently approved hotel and office complex near the Lincoln Alexander Parkway that also will exceed the town's height restrictions, and the 22-hectare, available land on Garner Road the Ontario Real Estate Corporation owns and is willing to sell to prospective developers.

Only last year members of Mr. Ferguson's advisory council urged Hamilton planning authorities to incorporate Ancaster's Official Plan into Hamilton's Official Plan in an attempt to protect Ancaster's small-town atmosphere. There has already been discussions between Ancaster residents and city planners about the issue.

City planners are slowly and carefully creating a new Hamilton Official Plan that incorporates all of the planning designations from the new suburban areas eight years after amalgamation occurred.

Mr. Ferguson said it is Ancaster's opportunity to integrate the former town's specialized characteristics into the city's official document and preserve the character of the community. If not, he said, Ancaster could become just another appendage to the ever-growing Meadowlands commercial and residential area and the sprawl that dominates the Mountain area.

Mr. Ferguson said it could take about a year for city planners to complete the city's new Official Plan, which gives the local community a deadline to get something into the Official Plan. If not, it will be a missed opportunity that will have reverberations throughout the community for decades to come, said Mr. Ferguson.

"Ancaster has its own Official Plan," he said. "It is the third oldest in Ontario behind Niagara-On-The-Lake and York. We need to preserve it. We are unique. We are special. We have to fight for it."

[flar]

^^ I think you may have opened Pandora's box here, LikeHamilton!

Ancaster seems to have had the most rampant development in this area over the last few years. They now have 2 big box centres and numerous large subdivisions. Traffic has been steadily worsening--try driving on Wilson, Rousseaux, Golf Links, McNiven or Old Ancaster Rd around rush hour. I don't know how much of this stuff was planned before and after amalgamation, but I do know I've often wondered to myself about Ancaster's poor planning. They should have been thinking about this stuff years ago. Still, the older neighbourhoods west of Willson are still quiet, sleepy neighbourhoods even if it takes 5 min to turn left onto Wilson.

[the dude]

it doesn't take long for things to get outta control when you're asleep at the switch.

personally, i don't feel that height necessarily affects the architectural heritage of a community. all of that new sprawl sure will and i respect the fact that lloyd seems to dislike it. i just assumed that he loved the meadowlands, etc.

[matt602]

Wow. Getting butthurt about 3.5 and 4 story apartment buildings?

I guess the preferred layout is house, house, house, house, house, walmart, house house, canadian tire, best buy, house, house, etc.

[LikeHamilton]

I don't know how much of this stuff was planned before and after amalgamation, but I do know I've often wondered to myself about Ancaster's poor planning. They should have been thinking about this stuff years ago. Still, the older neighbourhoods west of Willson are still quiet, sleepy neighbourhoods even if it takes 5 min to turn left onto Wilson.

I believe that almost 100% of Ancaster’s master plan is pre-amalgamation! Especially the "Meadowlands" area.

[raisethehammer]

this is too funny.
can anyone find Flar's phototour of 'Anywhere Ontario'?
I just want to browse through it again and enjoy the photos of their 'unique community'.

[thistleclub]

I'm pretty sure that the Upper Canadian settlers didn't have power centres, but maybe that's just a failure of imagination on my part.

Ancaster's policymakers are only half-serious about heritage, which is a shame given the history of the place. I remember the stink they put up with Tim Hortons' original Ancaster franchise near Wilson and Halson -- they finessed a stonework build that was architecturally more in line with a century cottage than an offramp drivethru. That franchise is now gone -- it's home to Celli's. There were unique aspects to Ancaster, but the last 20 years of development have erased most of that. A goodly share of the town's significant architectural heritage is showcased in stone buildings along Wilson East from Hendry to Halson.

The "character" issue dates back further than the 1980s. This page (http://www.myhamilton.ca/myhamilton/CommunitiesAndOrganizations/Historical+Ancaster.htm) from the City of Hamilton's website describes a century of suburban influence, maybe the most enduring aspect of Ancaster's heritage:

"With the construction of the Hamilton and Brantford Electric Railway reached as far as Ancaster in 1907, the character of the village started to change. More and more Hamilton businessmen found it convenient to work in the city’s downtown core, commuting back and forth to their homes in the expanding residential surveys in Ancaster."

[HAMRetrofit]

The uniqueness of Ancaster was eroded a long time ago. The plazas throughout the town are quite mundane. The library was recently molested. I love the historic stone buildings but it seems most things built within the last twenty years are ad hock at best. There is some interesting building pieces to work with like the old town hall and churches.

If I could have my way with Ancaster I would reconfigure the shopping plazas into parks and create a small town street in a way similar to Niagara-on-the-Lake. Make the town center a real destination with distinct character.

[realcity]

Wow. Getting butthurt about 3.5 and 4 story apartment buildings?

I guess the preferred layout is house, house, house, house, house, walmart, house house, canadian tire, best buy, house, house, etc.

^ That's funny.

I can't add anything more here to how Ancaster already destroyed itself with Power Centres. The 'village' area is car dependent, you won't see anyone walking around like real village centres. the hub being a Tim Hortons drive-thru inside a plaza. give me a break Ancaster. Remember these are the same people that think sidewalks ruin the street.

Besides this was a piece from Werner, he's a moron for writing the article in the same vane that most Ancaster residents view themselves and their crummy little no-place suburb. It's a geography of nowhere.

[raisethehammer]

^ That's funny.

I can't add anything more here to how Ancaster already destroyed itself with Power Centres. The 'village' area is car dependent, you won't see anyone walking around like real village centres. the hub being a Tim Hortons drive-thru inside a plaza. give me a break Ancaster. Remember these are the same people that think sidewalks ruin the street.

Besides this was a piece from Werner, he's a moron for writing the article in the same vane that most Ancaster residents view themselves and their crummy little no-place suburb. It's a geography of nowhere.


it's not just sidewalks that ruin a street, but CLOTHESLINES too!! the horror!!

[fastcarsfreedom]

Quote:
in the same vane that most Ancaster residents view themselves and their crummy little no-place suburb. It's a geography of nowhere

What a relief, I was really concerned that the "Us V Them" basis for this Forum had faded away.

In addition to being unscientific ("most Ancaster residents") these comments do nothing to advance the debate and are nothing more than self-gratification--a way for you to justify your viewpoints.

[realcity]

it's as scientific as 'my opinion'.

Note to all Forumers: No opinions are allowed here. only scientific, peer-reviewed research.

I live close to the meadowlands, have several friends, work colleagues and family living there and have attended bbqs and house parties. Trust me, they think they're special because they have a mortgage in the Meadowlands, and they believe the area is 'beautiful'. that's their opinion, that's fine with me. But I don't think many people are shocked to hear me report this. Ancaster residents usually can't wait for a discussion to come up about where people live. Or they'll have to slip it into a conversation where it wasn't necessary to drop where you live. Dundas residents are a close second to this behaviour, but no one is worse then Burlington residents, especially the ones the grew up in Hamilton, which is half of Burlington.

As far as calling it a "Geography of Nowhere" maybe you should read the book. That's not an us vs them comment, it's the truth.
http://di1.shopping.com/images1/pi/cd/88/d3/2000992193-177x150-0-0.jpg

[HAMRetrofit]

Spare yourself the trouble of reading that particular author's work. In my opinion, his rambling bias writing does not capture an in depth understanding of suburbs. There are much better works out there on the topic. He flat out hates them, and the bias really supersedes his arguments.

[RePinion]

I wouldn't say ignore the book altogether. It is one of the seminal works of the New Urbanism movement and sheds a great deal of light on the current thinking of urbanists within and without the academic community. Is it biased? Absolutely. Kunstler writes from an advocacy perspective and not that of cold empirical science. That being said, its data analysis has been criticized (quite rightly) as flawed and tendentious, but that doesn't detract from the fact that the principles behind its arguments are extremely compelling.

When an argument is objectively cogent (as I would submit Kunstler's is) bias one way or another is not enough to overwhelm it ...

[raisethehammer]

this may not be the right place for this, but I just saw on CBC news that Mississuaga has NO snow clearing bylaw. There are entire residential streets that haven't been shoveled once this winter. amazing.
I'm guessing Ancaster doesn't allow this since it's part of Hamilton...but I wonder how many other suburbs don't have snow clearning bylaws?

[hamiltonguy]

this may not be the right place for this, but I just saw on CBC news that Mississuaga has NO snow clearing bylaw. There are entire residential streets that haven't been shoveled once this winter. amazing.
I'm guessing Ancaster doesn't allow this since it's part of Hamilton...but I wonder how many other suburbs don't have snow clearning bylaws?

I wouldn't be surprised. It was prolly an oversight that noone ever thought of. It was small villages till suburbia set in a few decades ago, and all the suburbanites drove so no one probably thought of this.

The point is though that I doubt it's intentionally anti-pedestrian but is just ignorantly so.

[waterloowarrior]

I find this article very unintentionally funny, especially because I keep thinking about flar's "Everywhere, Ontario" thread (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=125154)

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/lcbo.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/crappytire.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/mcdonalds.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/walmart1.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/carts2.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/kelseys.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/indigo.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/ikea.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/futureshop.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/homedepot.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/bestbuy.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/satisfaction.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/beer.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/blockbuster.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/starbucks.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/carts.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/7-11.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/pizza.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/chapters.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/movies.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/shoppers.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/carts3.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/sobeys.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/walmart.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/everywhere/tims.jpg

http://aas.ath.cx/everywhere.jpg

it is a shame we might lose all this to an invasion of 4 storey towers

[hamiltonguy]

WOAH! When did Ancaster get an Indigo and an Ikea?

[raisethehammer]

dang....that IS some unique community!!
I think some of those warehouses are 4-6 stories high anyhow...maybe the local residents would allow buildings higher than 3 floors if the developers agree to not put any windows in the floors above the 3rd. then it would fit in beautifully with this stunning community as shown above.

[HAMRetrofit]

With all due respect to Ancaster, the town center does have some of the oldest heritage buildings in the province. I think every measure should be taken to preserve them. They deserve preservation and appreciation for their role in Ontario's history. The town center needs some guidelines on how to preserve and enhance these features.

I would not be so harsh on the big boxes. All of those stores can be found at Younge and Dundas, yet arguably the corner still maintains 'somewhat' of a unique identity. I really think that it is the format of them that is the problem. Consumers are the main drivers in subsidizing spaces to form like this. If communities are not demanding better formats for these developments the 'everywhere Ontario' is the result.

[waterloowarrior]

WOAH! When did Ancaster get an Indigo and an Ikea?

whoops, I forgot to take those ones out. oh well, I'm sure Ancaster residents and politicians would welcome these shops if they did come to Ancaster, as their design is very context-sensitive ;)

[flar]

About half of those big box pictures are from Ancaster, the rest are from Burlington, Dundas and Hamilton. The town centre is a lot different than that of course, the power centres are not really "in" Ancaster. I have a picture tour of other parts of Ancaster, which has a lot of interesting architecture, too: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=140652

Hamilton is in the strange position of being younger than its suburbs:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/ancaster2/00029.jpg

Ancaster, Dundas, Waterdown and the villages in Flamborough are all older than Hamilton.

[raisethehammer]

With all due respect to Ancaster, the town center does have some of the oldest heritage buildings in the province. I think every measure should be taken to preserve them. They deserve preservation and appreciation for their role in Ontario's history. The town center needs some guidelines on how to preserve and enhance these features.

I would not be so harsh on the big boxes. All of those stores can be found at Younge and Dundas, yet arguably the corner still maintains 'somewhat' of a unique identity. I really think that it is the format of them that is the problem. Consumers are the main drivers in subsidizing spaces to form like this. If communities are not demanding better formats for these developments the 'everywhere Ontario' is the result.


your points are well said...arguing the merits (or lack thereof) of big box sprawl has been done at great length in the discussion about new power centres, centre mall and mountain plaza mall.
This discussion is about people in Ancaster complaining about 4+ storey buildings being built in the exact area photographed above. It would be laughable if isn't wasn't so sad and embarassing.
Maybe the citizen groups should focus their attention on whats left of their 'heritage main street' before it ends up with more drive thrus and big box Fortinos stores. Although even that may be a lost cause. its' not a well-defined collection of historic architecture like you'll find in Dundas. Ancaster has more parking lots and strip malls in it's 'historic downtown' than you'll probably find in all of Dundas.

[realcity]

it's funny how pictures (which don't lie) can change someone's tune.

The 'village core' is not a real 'village core'. It's a thorough fare between the Fortinos strip plaza area/meadowlands and the Linc lower city access via highway 2. No more than 6 buildings are worthy of any significance and are spread out, and filled-in with typical shopping suburban strip plazas.

Rouseau House
The Spa of Ancaster
Bick Financial building
The Olde Mill Restaurant
The Towne Hall
and two churches

the rest is crap and NONE OF THESE BUILDINGS ARE ACCESSIBLE BY ANYTHING BUT A CAR.

[realcity]

I counted three of those pics that are in Burlington and not Ancaster. I think the point was made tho.

[vid]

Thunder Bay has a city wide height limit of 10 metres.

So there.

And I'm pretty sure that that Tim Horton's is in Thunder Bay. ;) They are stealing our identity!! :ahhh:

[raisethehammer]

dang..you guys are better than I if you can identify the location of those pictures. looks to me like it could be Burnaby or Laval.

[Millstone]

Thunder Bay has a city wide height limit of 10 metres.

So there.

And I'm pretty sure that that Tim Horton's is in Thunder Bay. ;) They are stealing our identity!! :ahhh:
There are more Robin's Donuts in TB

[HAMRetrofit]

I have made my criticism of suburban development known. Ancaster seems to function like a suburb, so it is unlikely that residents will see the problems with the way the town has developed.

The heritage buildings of Ancaster seem fairly well preserved. The town center needs guidelines on how to be reformatted properly. Simple density is not necessarily the answer. There is no reason that 4-5 story buildings should not be encouraged if done properly. The troubling thing is developments like Amica in Dundas. Projects like that seem to attempt simulating the past, but become completely distasteful. They have a way of really disturbing a community.

I don't know what do you do with new developments in a town like Ancaster?

[flar]

I don't know what do you do with a town like Ancaster?

I don't think you you do anything, really. Many people in the older parts of Ancaster are very wealthy and have no interest in walking anywhere or changing anything. They like it the way it is. The long time residents don't like all the new subdivisions and power centres, they live there because many of the roads and lots are secluded and private, and there really are many beautiful settings there--streams and waterfalls, lots of trees and hills.

[HAMRetrofit]

^ sorry Flar I meant new developments in Ancaster.

I think that wealthy established areas in Ancaster will become like Lawrence St. in Toronto. The city will just fill in around it like Don Mills and York Mills etc. I just think the new peripheral developments should be something new and avoid the simple commie block and single detached housing approach used so frequently here in Toronto. I also don't think that the new urbanist approach will work either. These areas are not downtown, so the experience of downtown will be impossible to emulate. Also, they are not streetcar suburbs like Westdale etc. so that will also be impossible to emulate.

[realcity]

Looks like natives have stopped development to their new Ancaster Fairgrounds. Which they wouldn't of needed if they didn't sell-off the former fairgrounds to a homebuilder.

'Unique' my foot..... it doesn't seem like they care about their own history.

[DC83]

Ancasterians care about their town's heritage... it's the 'new' Ancasterians that don't give an F. All they care about is how quickly they can get to Kelsey's "where everybody knows your name"...

[raisethehammer]

Ancasterians care about their town's heritage... it's the 'new' Ancasterians that don't give an F. All they care about is how quickly they can get to Kelsey's "where everybody knows your name"...

don't get me started on that travesty of a commercial.
that's the LAST place in town that should be using the Cheers theme.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Kelsey's is on that hate list too now?

[raisethehammer]

well, if you consider my dislike for their commercials meaning it's on a 'hate list' then yes.
I don't like the Toronto Maple Leafs. I guess that means I hate them too??
I'm not a fan of McDonalds....hate there too??
I didn't realize that someone's differing opinion automatically means they 'hate' something.

[HAMRetrofit]

No one hates anything.

However, I don't understand the point in defending Kelsy's. Is there something on the menu there that puts them in a category that vetoes all criticism.

We need to call it the way it is. Kelsey's is a cheep macro restaurant. It is generic and appeals to the masses. It avoids proximity to restaurants of high caliber taste (ie. there is no Kelsey's in Central Toronto and Hamilton). Could the world move on without a flinch if Kelsy's closed down. Sure.

The issue that I take to cheep macros like Kelsy's is their direct avoidance of competition. They locate where they can cheat the market and supply excessive free parking. They feed off of areas where there is no option but them, where they can provide cheep macro food to the mases, and where there is no distinguished second option.

[the dude]

No one hates anything.

i hate stuff. i've got a list as long as my arm. like this dancing banana, for example: :banana: ...hate that thing.

[JT Jacobs]

i hate stuff. i've got a list as long as my arm. like this dancing banana, for example: :banana: ...hate that thing.

Don't get me started or we'll have to open a hate thread. For the record, not only do I hate Kelsey's, I also loathe and detest it. Same goes for Boston Pizza and all those other insipid chains. And I hate emoticons too and . . . :D

[Millstone]

No one hates anything.

However, I don't understand the point in defending Kelsy's. Is there something on the menu there that puts them in a category that vetoes all criticism.

We need to call it the way it is. Kelsey's is a cheep macro restaurant. It is generic and appeals to the masses. It avoids proximity to restaurants of high caliber taste (ie. there is no Kelsey's in Central Toronto and Hamilton). Could the world move on without a flinch if Kelsy's closed down. Sure.

The issue that I take to cheep macros like Kelsy's is their direct avoidance of competition. They locate where they can cheat the market and supply excessive free parking. They feed off of areas where there is no option but them, where they can provide cheep macro food to the mases, and where there is no distinguished second option.

"Smart business"

[fastcarsfreedom]

This amusement never ends...honestly. If I renamed it the "dislike" list, what would the comeback have been then? Kelsey's is a freaking restaurant that no one forces you to go to--and, as some posters have already pointed out, it locates generally in areas you 'dislike'...and in my experience--it's usually surrounded by other restaurants and 'fern bars'--often chains, some also owned by Cara. The entertainment factor is only heightened here by the predictability of it all--if it's a chain, if it's suburban, if it has a parking lot, if it has a drive-thru, if it's not 'independent'--it's an automatic out--it's disgusting, insipid, 'macro'...etc etc etc. Even better--any comment opposing the 'general consensus' is automatically "defending" Kelseys...or whoever the target of the day is...heathens that they are "appealing to the masses".

[Millstone]

I like Kelsey's and Boston Pizza and don't live in suburbia. Does the universe implode now?

[fastcarsfreedom]

Perhaps Millstone, perhaps. You may be forced to choose. One cannot live the urban life and like the bruscetta at Kelseys...it's a complete disconnect.

[realcity]

MICROWAVE DINNERS.... that's what Kelsey's is.

that's why "be careful the plate is hot" as soon as I hear a wait(ress) say that, then I know I got a microwave dinner with a side of rice or salad that was made fresh.

My brother and a friend used to be high up in the chain.

[HAMRetrofit]

It is fine to 'like' Kelsy's, Boston Pizza, or whatever else. They just need to be described as what they are, cheep macros. It is unfortunate that they need to corner the market and reduce the number of restaurants that can potentially offer quality.

If we look at the same logic for beer. There is fine craft beer and there are cheap macros. Macros are able to corner most of the beer market because they create their product at the cheapest possible rates and offer a fairly neutral taste status quo. Most can get by with cheap macro while never exploring the fine taste of craft. I'm happy for those that can. But exploring the quality of craft just advances ones understanding of taste. So if you can conceivably see past the status quo I would encourage people to truly test the limits of what they like before defaulting to Blue ie. Kelsey's, etc.

Exploring one's taste can help maintain a certain level of quality in our society. This is what I would like to encourage. Testing out new and better things will allow those that can't accept defaulting to Kelsey's as a likely substitute to taste, to continue along happily enjoying quality prepared foods elsewhere.

[Millstone]

Perhaps Millstone, perhaps. You may be forced to choose. One cannot live the urban life and like the bruscetta at Kelseys...it's a complete disconnect.

Fortunately I was able to have some beer and wings at a BP in St. Catharines tonight without any incident. Whew!

[raisethehammer]

Perhaps Millstone, perhaps. You may be forced to choose. One cannot live the urban life and like the bruscetta at Kelseys...it's a complete disconnect.

you truly are a unique individual.
You manage to do this to every single thread you join.
I'll be sure to never repeat the blasphemous deed of stating any TV commercials that I don't like in the future.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Quote
You manage to do this to every single thread you join

I honestly am offended by this comment. I am in the ballpark of 500 posts, have been present here for a couple of years and have strived throughout that time to be a positive and earnest presence. I've never made it personal--I've stuck to ideas, philosophies and being true to what I believe. For my dissenting opinions I am forever branded a 'hijacker'...so be it. Fair enough, you call me out on my snide remarks regarding Kelseys--perhaps I should brush it off the way everyone else does and say "don't be silly, I was trying to be funny, I guess my sarcasm was lost on you"...but I'm not going to do that--I'll take responsibility for my snideness. To be frank, the atmosphere of this entire Forum has become increasingly adverserial--not because of dissent--but because of the way dissent is treated. The amazing thing is, that despite the many good and positive ideas I've read here, the predictability of so much that is said here is completely lost on so many. How many times have I, or other posters, raised the issues of moving beyond petty rhetoric--of thinking about ways suburban and urban environs can co-exist...where does that lead? That leads to threads about how 'ridiculous' Ancaster is for proclaiming itself to be 'unique'. I don't read about how the cultural institutions that ANCHOR the downtown can attract the interest of the tens of thousands of new residents moving to the area who have no context--good or bad--when it comes to downtown. How can the AGH and HPO grow their memberships and fill seats in light of the exploding regional population? I don't see ideas on that--instead I read about mafia plots to blow up buildings.

Now, before someone posts and says "you're taking these things too personally"--you can save that arguement. I am taking it personally because it's been brought to me that way. For everytime I've brought up some tidbit that I remember about downtown from 1985, or talked about my family's roots in the city or my ideas for the betterment of the core--I'm still the guy who hijacks threads--inasmuch as taking an opposing view is somehow "hijacking" a thread.

My ideas and opinions are as strong (and balanced) as ever. In the past months and weeks what civility that existed here has completely evaporated. So, at the risk of this Ancaster Forum going too far off course--perhaps someone out there should post here, or IM me if that suits you, and explain to me why I ought to remain on the high road, while everyone else behaves with brusqueness, paranoia and complete closed-mindedness. I see nothing here but the very behavior you accuse everyone who lives south of Fennell Avenue of possessing.

I completely hate the Leafs, by the way, and that's no joke either.

The Ancaster Fairgrounds--for the record, was sold by the Agricultural Society which runs the Ancaster Fair--I believe it was their perogative to take the money and relocate--and not some deed cooked up by a Town Council that had already ceased to exist by the time the sale went through.

[raisethehammer]

in all fairness, I apologize for suggesting you 'hijack' all threads. not a wise choice of words by me.
I'm just stunned that this last page of comments came because I said they shouldn't be using the Cheers theme.

At any rate, I'm happy to get this discussion back on topic about how Ancaster sucks, instead of Kelseys. ;)

[BCTed]

This amusement never ends...honestly. If I renamed it the "dislike" list, what would the comeback have been then? Kelsey's is a freaking restaurant that no one forces you to go to--and, as some posters have already pointed out, it locates generally in areas you 'dislike'...and in my experience--it's usually surrounded by other restaurants and 'fern bars'--often chains, some also owned by Cara. The entertainment factor is only heightened here by the predictability of it all--if it's a chain, if it's suburban, if it has a parking lot, if it has a drive-thru, if it's not 'independent'--it's an automatic out--it's disgusting, insipid, 'macro'...etc etc etc. Even better--any comment opposing the 'general consensus' is automatically "defending" Kelseys...or whoever the target of the day is...heathens that they are "appealing to the masses".

Agreed. I am apparently a huge suburb-lover and hater of downtown Hamilton, even though I have never made any comments expressing such sentiments. Most of the things that I write are hilariously stupid and completely incorrect.

[BCTed]

in all fairness, I apologize for suggesting you 'hijack' all threads. not a wise choice of words by me.
I'm just stunned that this last page of comments came because I said they shouldn't be using the Cheers theme.


The comments came about not because you expressed dislike for the commercial or its use of the them, but because you said that Kelsey's was the "LAST" place that should be using that theme, which implied that it was the least deserving place, which implied that it was high on your sh*t list of non-independent businesses.

You'd probably never eat at Kelsey's because the food is so bland, mass-produced, and of poor quality. You'd probably much rather eat at Bob's Independent Roadhouse in downtown Hamilton, where the people are real and the food is all fresh and is sourced from high quality local farms and nobody would ever consider spitting in your soup.

[markbarbera]

Folks this is supposed to be a thread about development concerns in Ancaster. If you wish to talk about good/bad restauants and the appropriateness of their commercial content, take it to a thread in 'Culture, Dining and Entertainment'. If you want to have a bit of a rant, a personal blog outside of SSP would be more appropriate so those who want to read content pertaining the the thread topic can do so in relative peace.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Thanks for the citation mark--if you have a look at the previous threads you'll see that the 'message track' issue has already been addressed.

[hamiltonguy]

This amusement never ends...honestly. If I renamed it the "dislike" list, what would the comeback have been then? Kelsey's is a freaking restaurant that no one forces you to go to--and, as some posters have already pointed out, it locates generally in areas you 'dislike'...and in my experience--it's usually surrounded by other restaurants and 'fern bars'--often chains, some also owned by Cara. The entertainment factor is only heightened here by the predictability of it all--if it's a chain, if it's suburban, if it has a parking lot, if it has a drive-thru, if it's not 'independent'--it's an automatic out--it's disgusting, insipid, 'macro'...etc etc etc. Even better--any comment opposing the 'general consensus' is automatically "defending" Kelseys...or whoever the target of the day is...heathens that they are "appealing to the masses".


I don't think anyone "hates" Kelseys, they're just mocking their horrible commercials. I eat at Kelseys often and even I agree the new commercials stink!

[JT Jacobs]

I don't think anyone "hates" Kelseys, they're just mocking their horrible commercials. I eat at Kelseys often and even I agree the new commercials stink!

No, I really do hate Kelsey's. I used to work for them about 100 years ago. Their steaks come in a can. They have the worst food imaginable.

[Millstone]

No, I really do hate Kelsey's. I used to work for them about 100 years ago. Their steaks come in a can. They have the worst food imaginable.

How do you fit a steak in a can?

[HAMRetrofit]

It hate the food Kelsey's serves. I believe it to look and smell worse than rubbish. I would imagine it tastes worse than rubbish. Having never tasted rubbish myself I cannot confirm this. Can anyone that has tasted rubbish confirm this?

[FairHamilton]

Now, has everyone here once worked for Kelsey's??? I worked for them years ago in Kitchener. Does anyone remember Paul Jeffrey??? He was the Kelsey's founder, and definitely a lover of the bar.

Anyways, as a new Hamilton resident. We closed on our house at the end of March and make the final move next weekend, we intend to become patrons of the AGH. In fact, I can hardly wait.

Now back to Ancaster........

[fastcarsfreedom]

FairHamilton--I remember Paul Jeffrey--I think they used to use him some in their advertising--founder and operator of the first location--which was/is in Burlington--last I knew it was still operating--not sure if that's still the case. Eventually they launched Montana's and bought the Canadian rights to Outack--and ultimately, sold the farm to Cara. I actually found the oldest locations--the "fern bar" types with the tiffany lights and the focus on the bar to be damn nice. Yes...it was a fern bar along with many of it's contemporaries in the U.S.--TGI Fridays, Ruby Tuesday, Bennigans, Applebees--etc...but the atmposphere was decent. Aesthetically some of the newer locations are a little lacking--and the bar has been greatly deemphisized.

And yes...onto Ancaster...home of a Kelseys.

[LikeHamilton]

I thought we had a section called Hamilton Cuisine

:???:

[the dude]

It hate the food Kelsey's serves. I believe it to look and smell worse than rubbish. I would imagine it tastes worse than rubbish. Having never tasted rubbish myself I cannot confirm this. Can anyone that has tasted rubbish confirm this?

i have eaten rubbish but i haven't eaten at kelsey's, so i can neither confirm nor deny your claim.

ancaster rules. my dad lives there. i love my dad, ergo i love ancaster and kelsey's. the end.

[Jon Dalton]

This is hilarious.

Kelseys isn't THAT bad, but it's not convenient to get to if you live downtown. I went there when I lived on the mountain and drove to buy milk.

This is one good example of where the urban and suburban ways can happily co-exist.

[flar]

We should all meet up at the Kelsey's in Ancaster after Doors Open this year!

[raisethehammer]

is Walmart on the Doors Open list this year??

[raisethehammer]

apparently, some of their 'unique community' includes wasted little idiotic front lawns.

Can we please just kick Lloyd Ferguson off council and let him join the Free Flamberstas people or something?


Mattamy: let's call porches green space

May 22, 2008
Eric McGuinness
The Hamilton Spectator
Ancaster (May 22, 2008)
Canada's biggest home builder wants to build townhouses with Ancaster's smallest front yards.

To do it, Oakville-based Mattamy Homes is asking Hamilton city council to classify covered porches as landscaped open space.

The idea is too much for Ancaster Councillor Lloyd Ferguson, who was distressed by Mattamy's high-density plan for the former fairgrounds on Kitty Murray lane even before planning consultant James Webb made the surprise porch proposal at a committee meeting Tuesday.

Webb said Mattamy wants townhouses facing Kitty Murray to cover 85 per cent of their lots. Then it's asking to add open, roofed porches extending up to two metres into the front yards, with the porches counting as part of the required landscaped space.

Ferguson noted Mattamy was already asking for setback and height exemptions for the development of 275 detached houses and 40 townhouses.

"Eighty-five per cent lot coverage jumps off the page," said Ferguson. "We've already compromised significantly."

A seemingly amazed Stoney Creek Councillor Brad Clark asked if indeed "the landscaped open space includes the porch?"

Webb said Mattamy would like to include it, that some municipalities do include porches.

"If we don't agree?" asked Clark.

"Then we would have to redesign the units," said Webb.

Committee members asked for a staff report on the issue.

emcguinness@thespec.com

905-526-4650

[flar]

What's the big deal? This isn't even really "in" Ancaster.

[raisethehammer]

the big deal is they are idiots.
He's probably thinking "front porch?? who would ever use one of those?"

[the dude]

front porches could lead to people being outdoors and gasp, perhaps even engaging in some sort of social discourse. ferguson is such an horse's arse.

[realcity]

Since when is a councilor an architect critic? Let the builder build what people will buy. What a moron.

[waterloowarrior]

I don't think there should be a problem with that; here's how Kitchener defines "landscaping"... basically as outdoor space for residents... other municipalities call it "amenity space"
"Landscaping" means outdoor space for use, enjoyment, recreation and utility, and may include natural
vegetation areas and constructed areas such as patios, decks, playgrounds, pathways and outdoor
recreational amenities. (By-law 94-1, S.5[g])this is Ancaster's definition

3.71 “Landscaping”
(a) means an area not built upon and not used for any purpose other than as a
landscaped area which may include grass, shrubs, flowers, trees and
similar types of vegetation, paths, walks, patios, fences, and similar
features; but
(b) does not include parking areas, parking lots, driveways, ramps or
maneuvering areas.

if patios are included, why shouldn't porches also be included?

[FairHamilton]

I don't think there should be a problem with that; here's how Kitchener defines "landscaping"... basically as outdoor space for residents... other municipalities call it "amenity space"
this is Ancaster's definition



if patios are included, why shouldn't porches also be included?

Because they are actually attached to the house (both porch and roof), and patios are not. They might abut the house but aren't actually attached.

I'm actually torn on this one.

I'm all for higher density, so whatever needs to happen to make that happen. But I'm also against the watering down of what is considered landscaped "green space".

Mattamy is really good at chewing up tons of green space. It's really sad they consider something created and installed by man to be creating green space....

[realcity]

o frig.... no one does anything with their front lawn anyway.... It just serves to spread crap out more.. making everything more car dependant. Maybe that's what Ancaster wants. Eveyone to own a car... just like Burlington in the absurd belief that poor people don't own cars.... so they won't travel into their fiefdumbs.

[raisethehammer]

Lol.....

[waterloowarrior]

o frig.... no one does anything with their front lawn anyway.... It just serves to spread crap out more.. making everything more car dependant. Maybe that's what Ancaster wants. Eveyone to own a car... just like Burlington in the absurd belief that poor people don't own cars.... so they won't travel into their fiefdumbs.

I agree, lot coverage restrictions especially create a more suburban (in a bad way) form of development

[highwater]

Because they are actually attached to the house (both porch and roof), and patios are not. They might abut the house but aren't actually attached.

I'm actually torn on this one.

I'm all for higher density, so whatever needs to happen to make that happen. But I'm also against the watering down of what is considered landscaped "green space".

Mattamy is really good at chewing up tons of green space. It's really sad they consider something created and installed by man to be creating green space....

I think we have to be careful how we define 'greenspace'. If you simply ask for more 'greenspace' without being explicit about its function, then that is all you will get: empty space that does nothing to contribute to the urban fabric, but just happens to be green. Then we end up with expanses of non-native turf grass that do nothing for the environment, and serve to separate people from one another. I like the term 'amenity space' since it defines the space by its function, not merely its emptiness, or 'greeness'.

I have to admit though, as a porch is an integral part of a house (or should be), defining it as 'landscaped open space' is a bit of a stretch.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Interesting debate--not because I care either way how it's settled, but because, for the most part there are now posters here on the Forum who are 'defending' Mattamy. Any port in the storm I guess.

[raisethehammer]

Interesting debate--not because I care either way how it's settled, but because, for the most part there are now posters here on the Forum who are 'defending' Mattamy. Any port in the storm I guess.

I can't speak for others, but I operate on principle. I don't have a list of groups that I'll hate to my grave.
If LIUNA decided tomorrow to fully restore Lister and use it for lofts, I'd lead a parade downtown wearing one of their shirts.

[thistleclub]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Meridian Credit Union Unveils “Why Do You Call Ancaster Home?” contest with Grand Prize of $10,000

Ancaster – As Meridian Credit Union prepares to open the doors of its newest branch in Ancaster, they are reaching out to community members to learn about their favourite local causes.

“We are so pleased to announce the “Why Do You Call Ancaster Home?” contest,” says Barbara Gardiner, Ancaster Branch Manager. “As part of the contest, we want to hear from Ancaster residents about their favourite local causes. We hope that this contest will help Meridian in getting to know the community better and understanding what really matters to its Members.”

The winner of the contest will receive $10,000 – half of which will be donated to Ancaster’s favourite cause.

“Meridian firmly believes in the value of giving back to one’s community and this contest poses a great opportunity for people to give back to their favourite cause and say “Thank You,” says Gardiner.

The contest closes on September 1st, 2008 and is open to all Ontario residents 18 years and older. To participate and to increase the chances for your cause to be eligible, visit www.ancastermeridian.ca, complete the online survey and entry form and encourage your friends and family to enter as well.

[raisethehammer]

all the beautiful drive-thrus, lack of trees, speeding cars and wonderful box stores.

[LikeHamilton]

Green light for fairgrounds development

Kevin Werner Jun 06, 2008 Ancaster News

Hamilton politicians gave the green light this week to the 300-plus residential development on the former Ancaster Fairgrounds, including a new temporary stop light.

"We can't wait for years and years," said Ancaster councillor Lloyd Ferguson. "We need a temporary solution now. I simply want the signalization."

Members of the planning and economic development committee approved a zoning bylaw that will see 275 single family homes and 40 condominium units on the 16.7 hectares of the former Ancaster Fairgrounds.

The issue was deferred by the committee last month after politicians disagree with some planning changes the developer, Mattamy Homes, had suggested.

Politicians will vote on the recommendation at their June 11 council meeting.

Mattamy Homes, the developer of the property, agreed after negotiations with the city, to withdraw a proposal to narrow the lots along Garner Road to be a new sustainable style of townhouse. Instead, the developer agreed to increase the lot coverage and construct conventional townhouses. Mattamy Homes will also contribute $10,000 to help pay for any traffic control measure the city eventually builds at the corner of Garner Road and Kitty Murray Lane. The cost of a stop light is about $100,000.

"I commend Mattamy for withdrawing the proposal," said Mr. Ferguson. "That would have been controversial for the residents in the area."

In the meantime, with the new fire station being constructed on the former fairgrounds property, plus Mattamy Home's starting to build in 2010, and another development proposed oppose the Mattamy Home development on Southcote Road, Mr. Ferguson urged the city to construct a temporary stop light to control the expected traffic problems.

Area residents last month urged councillors to do something to slow down speeding vehicles along Garner Road.

City traffic officials recommended no stop light be installed because it was not warranted.

As part of the development of the site, an environmental assessment is being conducted along Garner Road to determine, among other things, what type of intersection control will be needed for the area. The EA will also examine if Garner Road needs to be expanded. City officials expect the EA to be completed late this year.

Close the sale

Mattamy Homes, one of Canada's largest home builders, is scheduled to close the sale on the former fairgrounds property Dec. 31, 2008.

The proposed plan, which Mattamy Homes officials has touted as being "different" includes a condominium road, a parkette, a walkway, six new streets, the extension of Barnacle Crescent and Roelfson Drive.

Ward 1 councillor Brian McHattie expressed disappointment at local residents who didn't want Mattamy's original townhouse design.

"It's popular in the Greater Toronto Area, and accepted in Markham," said Mr. McHattie. "There needs to be an education process in Hamilton. I hope we can support the 'new urbanism'."

[LikeHamilton]

Heritage character maintained for village core office expansion

Mike Pearson Jun 06, 2008 Ancaster News

A three-storey office expansion in the heart of Ancaster's village core will maintain a heritage theme, a planning consultant says.

Speaking on behalf of his client, Barry Brownlow, consultant James Webb announced a proposed expansion for the Brownlow Associates building at 259 Wilson St. E. at this week's Ancaster Community Committee meeting.

The accounting and bookkeeping business, a village core mainstay since 1980, will increase its floor area by 622 square metres. The project includes a two-storey office expansion and a third storey for underground parking.

Mr. Webb said the applicant hopes to expand his business while limiting the impact on the surrounding area.

"They need to grow. There's not a lot of space at that site," Mr. Webb told the advisory committee. "It's really important to them to do this right."

A land acquisition and parking agreement has been established with the neighbouring property, Ryerson United Church. A shared driveway will be maintained.

An agreement registered on title will give office staff and clients access to an estimated 28 spaces in the Ryerson parking lot, Monday to Friday. The spaces will remain available to the church congregation on weekends.

The applicant is proposing no changes to the front of the building, and a slight increase in height at the rear. The building's natural stone faÁade will be maintained and enhanced. The original office building was constructed in two stages during the 1950s.

The Ancaster Community Committee passed a motion to support the expansion at Monday's meeting.

Ancaster Councillor Lloyd Ferguson was pleased the applicant will maintain the building's physical appearance.

"We would just prefer natural stone above grade," he noted.

A zoning amendment will be required for a portion of the church property, changing it from institutional to village area. Property owners within 120 feet will be notified of a public meeting, which Mr. Webb expects sometime this fall.

[LikeHamilton]

Have your say on city's urban official plan

Mike Pearson Jun 06, 2008 Ancaster News

Hamilton's new harmonized urban official plan should protect Ancaster from high density development, especially in the village core area, argues Ancaster's councillor.

Lloyd Ferguson is urging residents to attend Monday's public information centre at the Ancaster Old Town Hall, beginning at 6 p.m. City staff will formally present plans for the city's new official plan, a document that will shape the future of development within the amalgamated city from the present to the year 2031.

Mr. Ferguson said he was pleased to see city staff recommended a maximum population density of 50 persons per hectare in the Ancaster village core area. Other areas of the city have been earmarked for higher density of 100 or 200 persons per hectare.

"Don't think that wasn't a source of controversy among my council colleagues," Mr. Ferguson told community council members this week.

Mr. Ferguson and the Ancaster Community Committee want Ancaster's unique identity preserved through the updated official plan.

The document will merge the urban official plans of Hamilton's former suburban communities, including Ancaster, Dundas, Flamborough, Stoney Creek and Glanbrook.

"We need to reinforce that we're all really quite concerned about what's going on in town," said John Knechtel, a member of the Ancaster Community Committee.

Other key planning principals unique to Ancaster are a 10.5 metre building height bylaw and a 35 per cent limit for residential lot coverage.

The updated official plan will identify areas for activity centres, open space, neighbourhoods and new employment land.

The document provides guiding principals for planning and land use.

City staff will be on hand to answer questions and provide information at Monday's open house. For more background, visit the city's Web site at www.hamilton.ca/opurbanstructure

[SteelTown]

BIA clears final obstacle
Mandate begins in January

By Mike Pearson, News Staff

It’s official. Ancaster’s new business improvement area has been cleared for takeoff.

The BIA is set to hold its inaugural meeting in early December. Its mandate officially begins on Jan. 1, 2009. Last summer, business owners with frontage along Wilson Street from the Ancaster Old Mill to Dalley Drive were formally advised of the BIA plan.

Ancaster Councillor Lloyd Ferguson said the 60-day notification period passed with no objections.

"It’s pretty exciting news," Mr. Ferguson said. The city will hire a consultant to help market Ancaster’s village core as a shopping and tourist destination.

Mr. Ferguson said the BIA concept is long overdue in Ancaster. He looks forward to helping business owners apply for grants for streetscape and property improvements. BIA members are also eligible for commercial property improvement grants, Christmas display grants and other intiatives.

The BIA will replace the Ancaster Village Core Advisory Committee, formed by former Ancaster Councillor Murray Ferguson. The committee, which represents the interests of business owners and residents, will be disbanded.

Bob Wilkins, a member of the BIA steering committee, said the new committee will be a catalyst for renewal in Ancaster’s village core.

"It’s comforting to know there’s not a single objection to it," Mr. Wilkins said. Mr. Wilkins could also become a candidate for election to the BIA executive board. A board election is anticipated before the end of the year. "There’s a lot of great people," he said. "I’d be happy to assist in any way."

Ancaster will become the 13th BIA in the City of Hamilton. A BIA is established through a municipal bylaw and governed under the Ontario Municipal Act.

[Hammer Native]

Heritage character maintained for village core office expansion

Mike Pearson Jun 06, 2008 Ancaster News

A three-storey office expansion in the heart of Ancaster's village core will maintain a heritage theme, a planning consultant says.

Speaking on behalf of his client, Barry Brownlow, consultant James Webb announced a proposed expansion for the Brownlow Associates building at 259 Wilson St. E. at this week's Ancaster Community Committee meeting.

The accounting and bookkeeping business, a village core mainstay since 1980, will increase its floor area by 622 square metres. The project includes a two-storey office expansion and a third storey for underground parking.

Mr. Webb said the applicant hopes to expand his business while limiting the impact on the surrounding area.

"They need to grow. There's not a lot of space at that site," Mr. Webb told the advisory committee. "It's really important to them to do this right."

A land acquisition and parking agreement has been established with the neighbouring property, Ryerson United Church. A shared driveway will be maintained.

An agreement registered on title will give office staff and clients access to an estimated 28 spaces in the Ryerson parking lot, Monday to Friday. The spaces will remain available to the church congregation on weekends.

The applicant is proposing no changes to the front of the building, and a slight increase in height at the rear. The building's natural stone faÁade will be maintained and enhanced. The original office building was constructed in two stages during the 1950s.

The Ancaster Community Committee passed a motion to support the expansion at Monday's meeting.

Ancaster Councillor Lloyd Ferguson was pleased the applicant will maintain the building's physical appearance.

"We would just prefer natural stone above grade," he noted.

A zoning amendment will be required for a portion of the church property, changing it from institutional to village area. Property owners within 120 feet will be notified of a public meeting, which Mr. Webb expects sometime this fall.

So Councillor Ferguson is pleased this building will maintain it's physical appearance, he prefers natural stone. What's wrong with cement Lloyd?

[adam]

I guess he prefers natural stone in his own ward, but when it comes to a building that serves the entire city he wants the bare minimum.

[highwater]

Natural stone for me, but not for thee!

[Hammer Native]

That's the problem this city has, too many councillors just caring about what's good for their own ward and not the city as a whole. But that's probably an argument for another thread.

[adam]

Actually the thread's title is ancaster's 'unique' community under attack. So this discussion fits well here.

By voting against natural stone for city hall, the counsellors lowered the quality of a building that services the entire city - including constituents in their own wards.

[BrianE]

Actually the thread's title is ancaster's 'unique' community under attack. So this discussion fits well here.

By voting against natural stone for city hall, the counsellors lowered the quality of a building that services the entire city - including constituents in their own wards.

This is very true, all any developer has to do now is wordlessly point at City Hall whenever any heritage request from the City of Hamilton comes in.

"Sorry Hamilton, I can't afford any heritage considerations, I'm sure you understand" :runaway:

[highwater]

This is very true, all any developer has to do now is wordlessly point at City Hall whenever any heritage request from the City of Hamilton comes in.

"Sorry Hamilton, I can't afford any heritage considerations, I'm sure you understand" :runaway:

Ferguson has said as much. That's part of his agenda.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Being a purist as far as moderinism and Internationalism--I have strongly supported maintaining the Georgia marble on City Hall.

Nonetheless, drawing a comparison between a publically funded project such as City Hall and a privately financed one is, at minimum, a serious stretch. There is, in fact, no comparison to be made--essentially I chalk this up to an attempt to discredit Ferguson and add to the chorus of suburb-haters.

[adam]

How is a building with heritage considerations that is funded publicly different than one funded privately? Do they have different regulations that I am not aware of? Please enlighten.

[raisethehammer]

[QUOTEessentially I chalk this up to an attempt to discredit Ferguson and add to the chorus of suburb-haters.[/QUOTE]


yea, we get it. that's what you chalk everything up to that you don't agree with.
thanks for the time. feel free to move on to another city's forum and bother all of them.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Quote
yea, we get it. that's what you chalk everything up to that you don't agree with.
thanks for the time. feel free to move on to another city's forum and bother all of them.

I have shown utmost respect to you throughout my time here. I don't know if it's bitter disappointment on your part that I haven't "gone away" yet--but the last time I checked, you didn't have title to this Forum yet. There is absolutely no excuse for your dismissiveness--based on the fact that I don't always agree with you, or that I happen to live outside the city.

[raisethehammer]

Quote
yea, we get it. that's what you chalk everything up to that you don't agree with.
thanks for the time. feel free to move on to another city's forum and bother all of them.

I have shown utmost respect to you throughout my time here. I don't know if it's bitter disappointment on your part that I haven't "gone away" yet--but the last time I checked, you didn't have title to this Forum yet. There is absolutely no excuse for your dismissiveness--based on the fact that I don't always agree with you, or that I happen to live outside the city.

it has nothing to do with whether you disagree with me or not, or whether you live outside of the city.
It just gets tiring hearing the same old refrain no matter what the issue is. often you have great insight and great posts that add to the discussion. But this constant complex about suburbanites gets old.
Keep in mind, this is skyscraperpage, not big box page.

[markbarbera]

It just gets tiring hearing the same old refrain no matter what the issue is.

Is this intended to be irony or hypocracy?

[drpgq]

Oh no! Density in Ancaster.


City, home builder find middle ground

Reach compromise on Ancaster development densities
July 06, 2009
Nicole MacIntyre
The Hamilton Spectator
A housing development on the former Ancaster fairgrounds will bring neighbours closer together — but not as close as originally planned.

Councillor Lloyd Ferguson and Mattamy Homes worked out a compromise tonight to reduce the number of smaller lots in the subdivision at Garner Road East and Kitty Murray Lane.

The project will be less dense with only 68 lots with 30-foot frontages, instead of 98. The smaller lots will also be restricted to the inside of the subdivision.

“I still don’t like it. I still think it’s wrong for Ancaster,” said Ferguson, adding he also knew he didn’t have enough support to stop the proposal. “I can read the tea leaves.”

While other areas across the city have seen similar developments with small lots, Ferguson argued the Mattamy proposal didn’t fit with Ancaster’s character.

Planner James Webb, who represents Mattamy, said the developer agreed to the new deal to avoid defer delays.

“Call it a reasonable solution,” he said, noting he still believes the original proposal represented good planning.

The reduction in smaller lots will mean the development will lose about five units and have a grand total of around 320 townhouses, single-family homes and condominiums.

Mattamy increased the project’s density when it sold part of the property to the Catholic school board to build a new school. The city’s approval was critical to allow the school to be open by fall 2010, said Webb.

Residents submitted a petition opposing the development’s density.

Ferguson said he told residents the compromise was likely the best they could hope for.

Provincial and city policies encourage high density in new housing developments to minimize the need to push out the urban boundary.

nmacintyre@thespec.com
905-526-3299

[Hammer Native]

Gee Lloyd I didn't think any of the the Meadowlands fitted in with Ancaster's character, but you're the politician, what do I know? We've many times on this forum talked about the needs and benefits of densifying cities, and so have urban planning experts, etc. Let's look at another angle. What seems to be lost on Lloyd and these artificial Ancaster residents is that a variety of housing creates balance and why it is good to have balance. Not everyone is in the market for or can afford a big executive home, including those from that community who may want to stay in that community. (i.e. the young people, sons and daughters of the residents who are starting out, the empty nesters, the families who may split up.) Anyway I don't know if LLoyd is one of the councilors who follows this board as you pretty much need an open mind to stay with it.

Oh well good thing there's Hamilton to fill the need.

[Jon Dalton]

I don't think it's necessarily bad to have low density, exclusive areas within the city. Durand south of Herkimer is pretty low density as well. There will always be a slice of the population who can afford this lifestyle and their tax dollars are good for the community. It's the average low density sprawl priced for the middle class that was always the real evil, in my opinion. Let Ancaster mandate lower densities, and vacant land in the city becomes more attractive for those wishing to profit from more units per acre. Of course that only works if development fees are set to what they're worth.

[Hammer Native]

Absolutely, people who work hard and raise themselves up in life and want to live in exclusive neighbourhoods have that right and deserve to. But this councilor is talking about keeping that status quo basically for a whole (former) town, not just a few select neighbourhoods. And that's not what the demographics of the town are anymore, as it's gotten bigger and matured. Same with places like Oakville, and probably Burlington, where some people are slow to recognize there are lower classes of people and social issues, but there are.