Not sure we have a thread for this or not, but opposition continues to be strong for the 1065 Paramount Drive application.

https://www.thespec.com/news/upper-s...49c2c58c3.html
By Richard Leitner Stoney Creek News
Tuesday, July 4, 2023
https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...size=781%2C500

Strange how common it is for neighbors around potential developments to be planning and parking experts. Sometimes I wish developers would include an alternate plan for public meetings, like here's the 8 story version, if you don't like that we also have an 87 story tower backup plan with an attached paper mill. Oh well, the proposal seems fine for such a large plot of land, and likely less traffic than the 2 nearby schools.

these people never realize that older neighbourhoods like this one are also often built for a larger population. As neighbourhoods age, traffic levels decrease as people retire and stop commuting to work.

This area of Upper Stoney Creek hasn't seen substantial new development in 30-40 years and as a result is very quiet.. if you ever drive around there, Paramount is a relatively quiet street which is far from being over capacity... and half the houses are full of retirees. The area would have been far busier in the 1980's when it would have been full of large families.

It most certainly was, I was there. It barely had rush hour traffic, minus the single lane Mud Street, and now has only a fraction of the traffic that it once had. A few extra cars per minute in rush hour is nothing to complain about. Also this site has almost no neighbours that would have the right to complain about loss of privacy, noise, etc being it borders two schools, a football field and a plaza across the street.

Is this the church on the corner of Paramount and Mud?

EDIT: Nvm, google maps is a bit off on the address. It's the vacant plot of land a bit further north along paramount.

I live in the area, I don't see an issue with this development. Seems like a strong dose of nimby'sm on this one.

This is why every time a new survey is created in areas without existing homes near by, condo and apartment developments need to be built first or be part of the development plans so there's no stopping them. As we see, every time there are condo/apartment plans anywhere near existing SFHs, we get all this bitching and whining about it.

"Why don't we have enough housing? We need more housing! No, you can't build it in my neighborhood!!"

also don't build it on farm fields! If you must, build all 47,000 units we need by 2031 in a couple of midrise buildings on the dozen surface parking lots downtown away from where I live! Oh by the way - why can't my kids afford a detached house anymore?

That seems to be the average voters opinion.

R. L. Hyslop School was demolished

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...4347d3ba_b.jpg
R. L. Hyslop School Demolition | 10/24/2023 by Joe, on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...11150766_b.jpg
R. L. Hyslop School Demolition | 10/24/2023 by Joe, on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...1cc58f8a_b.jpg
R. L. Hyslop School Demolition | 10/24/2023 by Joe, on Flickr

I didn't know they were tearing it down.

I always said that would be a great location for a small condo development. What are the current plans for the property?

I haven't heard anything.

IIRC the city bought it to turn it into a park since downtown Stoney creek doesn’t have any park space right now.

Would've been a great location for a condo.

Parks are always nice, but this would be a relatively small one - even when including the school playground in front of it. It's also tucked away enough that it may not get much use. Feels like a waste of a quality location.

A condo/apartment building would be of much better use IMO.

The property is just over 2 acres, so it's not really that small. It would put it at about the same size as JC Beemer Park downtown.

There is now 3 separate condo applications along King St in the downtown, so there is additional population already coming to the area. The park will help provide an important amenity to those residents, and the wider downtown population which already exists and doesn't really have access to a municipal park right now.

Downtown Stoney Creek doesn't have much parkland. It's nice that this is a bit off the main street, but close enough to it.

Contentious plan for eight-story condo in Upper Stoney Creek heads straight to appeal tribunal
Builder reneges on vow to seek ‘made-in-Hamilton solution’

https://www.thespec.com/news/content...amilton-region

"A contentious plan for an eight-storey condominium building on a former church lot between Billy Green and St. Paul schools in upper Stoney Creek is being appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal, despite the builder’s promise to not do so.

John Ariens, planning consultant for proponent Mikmada Homes, said his client decided to file the Jan. 2 appeal after it became clear city planners wouldn’t support the 304-unit development, even with changes that tried to address residents’ objections.

City staff had been scheduled to present a report recommending denial of the related rezoning applications at the Jan. 16 planning committee, which was also to include a required public meeting."


"“From the beginning, an eight-storey tower was just something that was inflaming the community; they were so upset,” Clark said, noting more than 4,000 people have signed petitions against the plan, the most he’s ever seen for a development in his ward.

“The residents were not objecting to townhouses or stacked townhouses, they were objecting to the height of the (condo) building; that was their objection and I think it was a reasonable objection.”"

8 storeys is obviously crazy town. Here's yet another example of the city opposing and delaying housing that is desperately needed. Brad Clark isn't a stupid guy obviously but he's only opposing it because he has 4000 nutbar constituents that deserve naming and shaming. The city will get slammed at the OLT and rightly so.

Over 4000 people signed the petition.. that seems suspicious. It looks like only a handful of houses even face that property. Curious what, if any, proposals the city hasn't opposed lol