Duke-of-Waterloo
10-17-2010, 02:02 PM
H&M Deutschmann Townhouse Condos
81 Bleams Road West and 368 Fairview Street, New Hamburg
Developer: H&M Deutschmann Holdings
Consultant: GSP Group (http://www.gspgroup.ca/)
Public Meeting Minutes (Sept. 27) (http://wilmot.ca/clerks/Minutes&Agendas/September272010Minutes.pdf)
Neighbours of New Hamburg condo proposal join in opposition to development
BY Doug Coxon | NEW HAMBURG INDEPENDENT (http://www.newhamburgindependent.ca/) | Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Residents of a New Hamburg neighbourhood where a local developer is planning to build a high-density condominium on a park-like piece of property next to the Nith River, have banded together in opposition to the proposal.
During a public meeting in Wilmot council chambers last week, residents of the Fairview Street and Bleams Road neighbourhood detailed why they feel the development is inappropriate for the site, speaking out about potential impacts to property values, privacy, the environment and safety.
Some residents have asked that a final decision be deferred to the newly-elected council.
“This is too much on too small a property,” Fairview Street resident Mike Galt told councillors. “It’s like seeing downtown New Hamburg in my backyard.”
Developers Herb and Tim Deutschman have applied to rezone the property to build 15 luxury townhomes on two pieces of land with a combined area of just over one hectare.
The surplus land is behind an existing apartment building on Bleams Road and a home on Fairview Street where a garage would be repositioned to accommodate access to the development.
The two storey heritage brownstone style condos would contain between 1,200 and 1,400 square feet of living space.
Chris Pidgeon, of the consulting firm GSP Group, detailed the development for his client, emphasizing the developer’s intention to address any concerns and issues expressed by neighbours through the site plan approval process.
“The owners are willing to work with the residents in the area to make sure this is a quality development,” Pidgeon told council.
He said GSP Group is working with the Grand River Conservation Authority to fulfill requirements outlined by a slope stability study on the property.
The site has 81 mature trees, the majority of which will be retained, according to Pidgeon. Trees will also be planted to buffer and landscape the property.
Formal comments on the proposal are still outstanding from the GRCA and the Region of Waterloo. It’s expected the region will request an archeological assessment of the property.
Pidgeon emphasized how the application is consistent with provincial policy directives for infilling and intensification in urban residential areas.
He said the development is being designed in a way to have “no negative impact on adjacent property owners.”
For neighbour Ann Thaler, it was that and other comments that rang hollow.
“They talk about putting in buffers to prevent headlight glare, but honestly if your home is directly across [from the access road] there’s nothing you can do,” she commented.
For Thaler, parking is another major concern considering the development includes a variance to allow only two off-street parking spots per unit.
Many on Fairview Street believe visitors to the complex will use their street for parking, creating a dangerous mix on a street where visibility is already compromised by its slope and curve.
“I fear there will be accidents and loss of life,” Thaler said.
“That street has the blind curve. Every winter coming down that hill, someone slams into the guy’s property at the end of the street,” added neighbour Warren Wolfe.
The residents have hired consultant Paul Puopolo, general manager of IBI group, to outline their concerns.
Puopolo said the residents are not against the development, but feel it should be designed with sensitivity to surrounding land uses.
He suggests reducing the number of units to nine, increasing the setback from neighbouring properties to six metres and maintaining the township’s per-unit parking requirements to three off-street spaces.
Residents also want a nine-metre height restriction on the townhomes to better fit in with the height of surrounding homes.
Fairview Street resident Jan Boucher called the proposal’s site specific provisions for reduced setbacks, smaller lot sizes and fewer parking spaces “minimization on steroids.”
“It’s indicative of how unrealistic the proposal is,” she said.
“We’ve lived here for two years and, to be honest, we wouldn’t have purchased on Fairview if we knew what was being proposed,” she said.
Boucher echoed several environmental concerns expressed through written comments to the township, citing the need to protect a natural environment perched “on the edge of a Canadian Heritage River.”
“What’s the guarantee this environment will be protected should this development be allowed?,” she asked.
She also fears what could happen if rezoning takes in the six plex on Bleams Road, allowing a larger building there in the future.
“What council allows will be precedent setting.”
Jim Hollinger, whose home and large yard directly abuts the development property, demonstrated the six-foot distance between the corner of one of the proposed townhomes and his property line by placing his hand on top of his head and wiggling the pinkie finger that would touch his backyard.
“This project proposes a large townhouse building six feet from my property line,” he said. “I submit that that kind of a backyard is unconscionable.”
Mike Galt, who helped align neighbours to oppose the development, said they believe in infill, “but infill that’s in keeping in the spirit of the planning act and the neighbourhood.”
“This project is literally going to end up in council for years to come — trying to fix something instead of doing it properly in the beginning,” he urged council.
“Is it going to be complete maximization of profit, or making a livable community?”
For Jody Pfaff, the reason for opposing the project is simple.
Although the proposal will have no affect on his property, he feels deeply for the people it will impact.
“I paid a premium for the property that I have because it is one of New Hamburg’s gems," Pfaff said. “We don’t have many of those gems. And I don’t see a need for it in that space.”
Council deferred its decision pending comments from the region and the GRCA.
Staff is expected to make a recommendation once it receives all of the comments.
Township planner Andrew Martin said staff’s intent is to circulate a report to residents prior to holding an additional public meeting on the proposal.
http://www.newhamburgindependent.ca/news/article/220909 (http://www.newhamburgindependent.ca/news/article/220909)
81 Bleams Road West and 368 Fairview Street, New Hamburg
Developer: H&M Deutschmann Holdings
Consultant: GSP Group (http://www.gspgroup.ca/)
Public Meeting Minutes (Sept. 27) (http://wilmot.ca/clerks/Minutes&Agendas/September272010Minutes.pdf)
Neighbours of New Hamburg condo proposal join in opposition to development
BY Doug Coxon | NEW HAMBURG INDEPENDENT (http://www.newhamburgindependent.ca/) | Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Residents of a New Hamburg neighbourhood where a local developer is planning to build a high-density condominium on a park-like piece of property next to the Nith River, have banded together in opposition to the proposal.
During a public meeting in Wilmot council chambers last week, residents of the Fairview Street and Bleams Road neighbourhood detailed why they feel the development is inappropriate for the site, speaking out about potential impacts to property values, privacy, the environment and safety.
Some residents have asked that a final decision be deferred to the newly-elected council.
“This is too much on too small a property,” Fairview Street resident Mike Galt told councillors. “It’s like seeing downtown New Hamburg in my backyard.”
Developers Herb and Tim Deutschman have applied to rezone the property to build 15 luxury townhomes on two pieces of land with a combined area of just over one hectare.
The surplus land is behind an existing apartment building on Bleams Road and a home on Fairview Street where a garage would be repositioned to accommodate access to the development.
The two storey heritage brownstone style condos would contain between 1,200 and 1,400 square feet of living space.
Chris Pidgeon, of the consulting firm GSP Group, detailed the development for his client, emphasizing the developer’s intention to address any concerns and issues expressed by neighbours through the site plan approval process.
“The owners are willing to work with the residents in the area to make sure this is a quality development,” Pidgeon told council.
He said GSP Group is working with the Grand River Conservation Authority to fulfill requirements outlined by a slope stability study on the property.
The site has 81 mature trees, the majority of which will be retained, according to Pidgeon. Trees will also be planted to buffer and landscape the property.
Formal comments on the proposal are still outstanding from the GRCA and the Region of Waterloo. It’s expected the region will request an archeological assessment of the property.
Pidgeon emphasized how the application is consistent with provincial policy directives for infilling and intensification in urban residential areas.
He said the development is being designed in a way to have “no negative impact on adjacent property owners.”
For neighbour Ann Thaler, it was that and other comments that rang hollow.
“They talk about putting in buffers to prevent headlight glare, but honestly if your home is directly across [from the access road] there’s nothing you can do,” she commented.
For Thaler, parking is another major concern considering the development includes a variance to allow only two off-street parking spots per unit.
Many on Fairview Street believe visitors to the complex will use their street for parking, creating a dangerous mix on a street where visibility is already compromised by its slope and curve.
“I fear there will be accidents and loss of life,” Thaler said.
“That street has the blind curve. Every winter coming down that hill, someone slams into the guy’s property at the end of the street,” added neighbour Warren Wolfe.
The residents have hired consultant Paul Puopolo, general manager of IBI group, to outline their concerns.
Puopolo said the residents are not against the development, but feel it should be designed with sensitivity to surrounding land uses.
He suggests reducing the number of units to nine, increasing the setback from neighbouring properties to six metres and maintaining the township’s per-unit parking requirements to three off-street spaces.
Residents also want a nine-metre height restriction on the townhomes to better fit in with the height of surrounding homes.
Fairview Street resident Jan Boucher called the proposal’s site specific provisions for reduced setbacks, smaller lot sizes and fewer parking spaces “minimization on steroids.”
“It’s indicative of how unrealistic the proposal is,” she said.
“We’ve lived here for two years and, to be honest, we wouldn’t have purchased on Fairview if we knew what was being proposed,” she said.
Boucher echoed several environmental concerns expressed through written comments to the township, citing the need to protect a natural environment perched “on the edge of a Canadian Heritage River.”
“What’s the guarantee this environment will be protected should this development be allowed?,” she asked.
She also fears what could happen if rezoning takes in the six plex on Bleams Road, allowing a larger building there in the future.
“What council allows will be precedent setting.”
Jim Hollinger, whose home and large yard directly abuts the development property, demonstrated the six-foot distance between the corner of one of the proposed townhomes and his property line by placing his hand on top of his head and wiggling the pinkie finger that would touch his backyard.
“This project proposes a large townhouse building six feet from my property line,” he said. “I submit that that kind of a backyard is unconscionable.”
Mike Galt, who helped align neighbours to oppose the development, said they believe in infill, “but infill that’s in keeping in the spirit of the planning act and the neighbourhood.”
“This project is literally going to end up in council for years to come — trying to fix something instead of doing it properly in the beginning,” he urged council.
“Is it going to be complete maximization of profit, or making a livable community?”
For Jody Pfaff, the reason for opposing the project is simple.
Although the proposal will have no affect on his property, he feels deeply for the people it will impact.
“I paid a premium for the property that I have because it is one of New Hamburg’s gems," Pfaff said. “We don’t have many of those gems. And I don’t see a need for it in that space.”
Council deferred its decision pending comments from the region and the GRCA.
Staff is expected to make a recommendation once it receives all of the comments.
Township planner Andrew Martin said staff’s intent is to circulate a report to residents prior to holding an additional public meeting on the proposal.
http://www.newhamburgindependent.ca/news/article/220909 (http://www.newhamburgindependent.ca/news/article/220909)