CATCH Articles:
Turtle ponds developer backs out
May 31, 2007
The company at the centre of the controversy over development of environmentally sensitive lakeside lands in Stoney Creek has withdrawn its application for rezoning of the property. In a May 29 letter to city staff, the president of Church Street Developments says his company is responding to community perceptions about the negative environmental effects of their proposal to build 42 townhouses on lands that they have offered to purchase from the Catholic school board.
“Regardless of the likelihood of success of our proposal,” writes Anthony DiCenzo, “we have no interest in developing a property which, in the process of our doing so, would result in our being perceived as either damaging the environment or serving as a precedent for other developments with less environmental merit.”
The proposal was the focus of a six hour public meeting in late April attended by over 300 people, most of them determined to protect a small natural area on the north side of the QEW just east of Confederation Park. Issues raised by opponents included the unprecedented removal of an Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) designation from the city’s official plan, apparently in response to the development plans.
Residents strongly argued the lands remain environmentally important and pointed to several provincial environmental designations as well as the discovery of possibly rare salamanders in the area.
DiCenzo’s letter says DNA testing has now shown that the salamanders are of the uncommon Blue-spotted species rather than the provincially threatened Jefferson Salamander. He goes on to express confidence that the Church Street Developments proposal would win approval, but concludes that public perception was against the plan.
“Our company and its affiliates have always held considerable pride in the extent to which we proactively and responsibly deal with environmental matters and issues, and recognize that, for both the public and private interest, sometimes it is important to deal with perceptions of environmental impact, and not just with the scientific data regarding such impact.”
The letter concludes with the formal notification that the company has “elected to withdraw our application” for the rezoning to accommodate the townhouse development and that Church Street Developments “intend to dissociate ourselves from any further activities pertaining to the acquisition or development of same”.
A second development – of 44 townhouses – has been proposed for public school board lands adjacent to the Catholic site, but has not yet come before the city’s planning committee. It is unclear what the effect of the Church Street Development’s withdrawal will have on this second proposal.
At the April 24 meeting, the leader of the citizen group fighting to protect the area, recalled an earlier meeting where over 100 residents had been told “whether you like it or not, the development is going to happen”.
Sherry Revesz also recounted a conversation with Stoney Creek councillor Maria Pearson about the citizen group’s efforts to have the lands purchased by the Hamilton Conservation Authority. She said Pearson’s response was to ask who is going to pay the developers and to argue that the developers have put over two years and a lot of money into this already.
Pearson responded that the conversation had included other information as well but argued that Revesz would also ask for compensation if she were in a similar situation.
“You also have to understand that this has gone through two years of process, not just with the developer, with the board, with the landowner, but also with staff,” Pearson continued. “And somewhere, somehow, somebody will have to address this.”
Councillors decided to postpone any decision until both proposals were in front of them. Residents want both properties should be transferred to the Hamilton Conservation Authority for permanent environmental protection.