 By Staff
January 11th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
A Burlington based real estate agency, the Rocca Sisters, reported that at “the end of December, year to date, the average price of a freehold property was $891,566, up 4.8% from last year.
“There were 1736 sales in 2019, up 3.1% as compared to 2018.
“Days on market were down 9.4% from last year. All things considered, it was a strong year where we saw a fairly balanced market and average gains.
“The more fascinating result from 2019 is the inventory level that remained at the end of the year. The month of December saw 60 sales in total, down 7.7% as compared to December 2018 and sale prices increase by 10.1%. The average price for the month of December was $978,067 which was the highest average price ever achieved in Burlington.
At the end of December there were 123 freehold properties available for sale in Burlington (under $3 million dollars).
To put this into perspective, at the end of December 2016, there were 119 properties listed for sale.
During the intervening years and the years prior, inventory levels were double these numbers. The interesting thing is, properties are still selling for under 98% of the listing price. What does all of this mean for our Burlington clients?
If you are planning to list your home this year, list it early. As to listing price, trust the evidence. Better to list sharp. If the price is right you will either sell for your asking price or possibly attract multiple offers. If you list too high, it’s very difficult to recover in this type of market.
 By Pepper Parr
January 10th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
They are referred to as MTSAs – Major Transit Station Areas – they have be-deviled the thinking of city council for some time.
There was a point when a former Mayor, trying to assure residents that over-development would not take place, wasn’t fully aware of what role MTSA’s played in development.
The city has since learned that they are the biggest influence in what is going to be built where. There are those who knew and understood the bigger picture – they just didn’t want to be the one to tell the public what the public did not want to hear.
Public transit is what is being pushed upon a public that still clings to its automobiles.
 There was a point at which the transit department had recommended tearing down the transit station. Few in Burlington really want to ride a bus – but they are going to have to if they want to get around efficiently.
Somewhere in the bowels of city hall there is, hopefully, at least a draft version of a longer term transportation report – it is now four years overdue. But that is another matter.
Transportation is not efficiently led and has yet to produce a significant report since the new leadership was put in place. But that is another matter to be discussed at a more appropriate time.
 Were it not for the designation of the John Street Bus terminal as an MTSA – this building may never have been approved. Burlington was assigned two MTSAs – one at the Burlington GO station, which was close to perfect and another at the John Street bus terminal which didn’t make any sense to anyone – other than the developer who used the existence of the designation to get a favourable OMB decision due to the existence of the John Street MTSA.
Many citizens have urged the city to make application to the Ministry of Municipalities and Housing to move the location of the Urban Growth Centre (more north) and to scrap the idea of an MTSA on John Street.
A consultant the city had hired said at a Standing Committee meeting to the best of his knowledge no one had asked the provincial government to change the boundary of an Urban Growth Centre.
The removal of an MTSA was said to be a Regional matter.
 Marianne Meed Ward wearing a smile. In her most recent Newsletter the Mayors said:
“Only the Region and Province can change MTSA designations and until that happens, Burlington needs to update its Official Plan policies and Zoning Bylaw before the development freeze ends on March 5 to better define and control the impact in each area. We are on track to meet that deadline with upcoming discussions at committee Jan. 14 and Council on Jan. 30, followed by a 20-day appeal period.”
True but what bothers many is that the Mayor and council have yet to ask the province or the |Region to remove the John Street MTSA designation.
 Burlington MPP Jane McKenna – waiting for a call? Why hasn’t this been done?” asks one very active ward 2 citizen. She is not alone in asking that question.
MPP Jane McKenna is reported to have explained to ECoB what the city has to do and is said to be waiting for a call.
There may be some egos at play here. There isn’t much in the way of thinking shared by the Mayor and the MPP.
By Pepper Parr
January 10th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
On Tuesday of next week there will be a Statutory Public meeting at which Planning Staff will present their thoughts on the Land Use Study report that has been available to the public since before Christmas.
It’s a critical report that the city must get right the first time.
It’s a complex report; one that the five new members of council will struggle with.
 The cover of the Land Use Study report tells the full story. The images of the downtown core as it is today – all within the circled pictures – and the site that is about to undergo new development. That is Burlington’s future. The limitations on that development are the issue. The Gazette has talked to several members of Council about their take on the report.
ECoB had published an Open Letter to city council imploring them to defer receipt of the ICBL Land Use Study Report on January 14 and to reject the recommendations for Official Plan and Zooming Bylaw Amendments.
We asked members of Council by email for a comment on the ECoB request.
We got the following from a council member. “I feel it is too early for me to comment. I have meetings this week with staff that will help form my thoughts.”
We are not going to identify the council member but want to comment on the position taken.
Statutory meetings are set up to allow Council members to ask questions of Staff and any consultants that produced a report. The public can make a delegation – registration is not required for a Statutory meeting.
The regrettable part of the meeting is that it takes place during working hours – which will limit real public participation. Those with a vested interest will appear – there is at least one major apartment operation planning to appear.
The question and answer between Council and Staff is always very enlightening; when it takes place in public we get to learn how Councillors arrive at their decisions. What Staff have to say is said in public – which is the way decisions are supposed to be made.
One would not want to encourage Councillors to meet in private with senior staff. Burlington’s public does not have a lot of trust in the Planning department – they see serious gaps between what the planners think their city should look like and what they think their city should look like.
There was an occasion when a former city manager walked over to a developer, shook his hand vigorously when their 20 storey + development had just been approved by Council. There was significant public opposition to the development – it began the process that is going to change not only the skyline of the city but the feel one will have as they walk the downtown streets.
Ward 2 Councillor Lisa Kearns sets out her position in her most recent newsletter. Do let us know if there is any meat on the bone she has thrown you.
 Ward 2 Councillor Lisa Kearns -most of the downtown is in her ward. “Key matters regarding land use planning for the Downtown / Urban Area are coming forward for important discussion. As your Councillor, my position is aligned with the values many of you have shared with me – to deliver a focused plan that represents reasonable growth, not over-development.
“The upcoming meetings are an opportunity to continue bringing your vision forward in planning for the future of our downtown.
“Now and in the coming years, Burlington will welcome many new residents and businesses. A majority of these will be through increasing housing and employment opportunities across the City and especially in the Mobility Hubs, including Ward 2’s Burlington GO area. The planning work underway right now through the Interim Control By-law (ICBL) and the Re-examination of the Adopted Official Plan will support this and continue to be a focus of Council.
“Stepping into 2020 will be a flurry of activity in finalizing and responding to a series of milestones in the Local, Regional, and Provincial Planning processes. We are going to get a better plan for the downtown that truly reflects the Community and Council’s vision. Your engagement matters. I recognize that timing and the ability to schedule attendance for these meetings might not be optimal, what I can assure you is that you’ve put your trust in me to act on your behalf. I continue to work diligently for you to ensure that every detail in this process is vetted, challenged, understood, and analyzed to deliver on an Official Plan we can all be proud of.”
 Mayor Marianne Meed Ward focuses on transit matters – height limits don’t get that much comment from her – at least not at this point. In her most recent Newsletter Mayor Marianne Meed Ward sets out her position when she said: “The Downtown MTSA has been used to justify development well above current planning provisions, including the recent Ontario Municipal Board decision granting 26 storeys at Martha and Lakeshore where 4-8 storeys is permitted. This led council to implement a one-year Interim Control Bylaw to freeze development and conduct a land-use study of the downtown and Burlington GO area.
“The result? The downtown bus terminal doesn’t currently meet the MTSA threshold and is unlikely to without future improvements or enhancements, and Burlington GO has the potential to accommodate much more transit ridership than it presently does.
“There are several types of MTSAs in provincial policy, including a “major bus depot in an urban core.” Dillon concludes the John St. terminal “does not function as a major bus depot,” and the Downtown MTSA “is not expected to be a significant driver for intensification beyond that which is required by the Downtown Urban Growth Centre (UGC)”
“Dillon also states there are significant gaps in provincial and city MTSA policies and definitions. The downtown is also classified as an Anchor Hub — the same designation for Pearson Airport and Toronto Union Station without anywhere near the same passenger volumes.
“The report also found the Burlington GO area is under-performing relative to its potential given planned 15-minute regional express rail service. There’s opportunity to direct significant future job and population growth here.
“Only the Region and Province can change MTSA designations and until that happens, Burlington needs to update its Official Plan policies and Zoning Bylaw before the development freeze ends on March 5 to better define and control the impact in each area. We are on track to meet that deadline with upcoming discussions at committee Jan. 14 and Council on Jan. 30, followed by a 20-day appeal period.
Related news content:
The ECoB Open Letter
 By Pepper Parr
January 10th, 20120
BURLINGTON, ON
We now have the report.
It is complex. There is a lot of information but it is a little short on clarity.
It will take a bit to go through the material and do an early analysis.
There are nine sections – some of the material has been made public before.
It will take a bit of time to do a thorough reading of all the material and begin to analyze. We can share some of the material – a detail of parts of the city and what the height recommendation is.
   The scoped re-examination of the adopted Official Plan is being undertaken at the same time as the Interim Control By-law Land Use Study.
The findings of the Interim Control By-Law Land Use study were released in late December2019 (PL-01-20) and will be presented to the Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility Committee on January 14, 2020.
A Council decision on the ICBL is anticipated for January 30, 2020.
The ICBL Land Use Study proposes an Official Plan amendment to the existing in-force OP and a Zoning By-Law amendment to strengthen the integration between land use and transit by introducing policies related to transit-supportive development;
strengthens the concept of Major Transit Station Areas into the Official Plan; establishes a policy framework including an MTSA typology distinguishing the GO Station MTSAs from the Downtown Bus Terminal;
introduces development criteria for development applications within the ICBL study area;
updates or adds definitions to the OP to align with Provincial policy documents and/or assist in the interpretation of OP policies;and,introduces additional permitted uses and heights on lands in proximity to the Burlington GO Station.
The two reports, the Land Use Study and the Closer Look at Downtown, to use the language of the Planners, “inform each other”.
The findings of the Interim Control By-law Land Use Study that have been made public and will be debated and discussed at Council on Tuesday. The Taking a Closer Look report will be debated and discussed by Council on Thursday.
Is there an end in sight to all these reports?
The Planning people set out the schedule at the bottom of this report.
If council can arrive at decisions that keep those active in municipal affairs at least a little bit happy – it will be a major achievement.
At this point it is far from certain that they can pull this off.
 By Jim Young
January 10th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
Jim Young is going to be out of town on January 14th & 16th and unable to delegate when the City’s Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility Committee meet to discuss the Interim Control Bylaw (ICBL) and the Scoped Review of the 2018 Official Plan (OP). Here is what he would have loved to say.
Considering the Dillon Report on the ICBL, The Official Plan Review (downtown precincts only), the continuing backlog of intensification zoning amendment applications and the complete lack of progress on the Transportation and Mobility Master Plan, I have to conclude that the ICBL has achieved nothing for the people of Burlington.
The ICBL was intended to buy the city a one year pause on the land planning process which would allow them to correct the more egregious errors of the OP. Citizens were hopeful that their concerns with the OP would be addressed. Concerns that: downtown intensification and building heights were extreme, exceeded provincial guidelines and that there was no Transit Plan in place to address the increased traffic and congestion that over-intensification would bring.
The over-intensification was predicated on the precinct being designated an Urban Growth Centre (UGC) which in turn was based on the Region’s designation of the bus ticket office on John Street as a Major Transportation Station Area (MTSA).
The ICBL and the OP Review have failed to address these concerns in a way that means anything to the people of Burlington.
Even the Dillon Report suggests the John Street Bus Terminal is not on a priority Transit Corridor, not supportive of regional transit and does not function as a major bus depot. Yet, so long as that John St. MTSA designation stays in place, any changes to the OP are meaningless and the proposed scoped review of that OP bears this out. Planners have presented two downtown options which amount to unattractive “Short Squat” density on Brant St from Ghent to Lakeshore or Alternating Extremely High buildings along that same stretch, neither of which have won favour with council and certainly do not appeal to local residents.
In the meantime the ICBL has not stopped developers from submitting numerous amendment applications, it has only stalled these in the process. They are still awaiting planning consideration while the ICBL is in effect. So even the hoped for “slowdown effect” has not been achieved. This will eventually allow developers to bypass the process by appealing to LPAT (Land Planning Appeals Tribunal) when planners are too overloaded to respond in time.
This will be aggravated by changes at LPAT, shortening the city’s response time from 210 to 90 days (120 for OP Amendments). Now even more failure to respond appeals will go to LPAT. Wins for developers will increase due to the fact they can now claim “compatibility” with the already approved/appealed hi-rises on Brant, Lakeshore and Martha Streets and the fact that city planners plan to “average” precinct density targets while developers and LPAT review applications on a case by case basis.
 The Burlington GO station is clearly a point where different forms of traffic can flow in and flow out.  Report suggests the John Street Bus Terminal is not on a priority Transit Corridor
The end result will be a severely over-intensified downtown without a transit plan in place to move the additional people around or to the real MTSA at Fairview GO. While a dedicated few will cycle or walk from downtown to the GO station, it was always more likely that commuters already committed to transit into Toronto would take a bus to the GO. If the bus is there! Yet all the talk of “Integrated Transportation and Mobility” are centered on cycling, walkability and active mobility modes, ignoring the most efficient way to move people in an over-intensified and congested downtown: Improved Public Transit.
Sometimes it feels like downtown mobility concepts seek health outcomes more than serious transit solutions.
The year of grace granted by the ICBL would have been better served by planners creating the transit plan that would have connected the city’s Urban Growth Centres to its GO stations, eliminating the need for a downtown mobility hub, working instead with the Region to remove that downtown MTSA designation. The Dillon Report clearly points out that this is a regional responsibility, “………The Province directs that upper-tier municipalities such as the Region of Halton are responsible for evaluating the major transit station areas within the region, delineating the boundaries of each major transit station area ……….”.
 Heather MacDonald with Planner Jamie Tellier at a council meeting. Heather MacDonald, Executive Director of Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility suggests this was clearly the original intention of the City’s ICB: …. “The recommendation to implement an ICBL ……………. will come back to City Council on Jan. 14 with proposed amendments ……………. that will make it possible for new development in the identified study area to be better informed by the City’s transit, transportation and land use vision……” I ask again, as many did in 2017/2018: Where is The Transit Plan on which all this intensification is based?
City advocacy groups; Engaged Citizens of Burlington, We Love Burlington and Waterfront Plan B are disappointed (see Open Letter, Gazette January 6) that after so much citizen outreach, feedback and supposed input so little attention has been paid to their voices.
 Personally, I fear the downtown as we know it is already lost to over development. My only hope is that maybe now, finally, the city is coming to realize that that the voices of city residents must be heard. Because so far they have not.
Perhaps city engagement efforts should involve a little less reaching out, and a little more listening in.
Jim Young is an Aldershot resident who was part of the group that formed ECoB. He delegates at city council frequently.
 By Pepper Parr
January 9th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
Mayor Marianne Meed Ward today tweeted that “The Third Party Advertiser who targeted my 2018 mayoral election campaign with negative advertising was arrested over the Christmas holidays, and will make his first court appearance Tuesday, Jan. 21 at the Milton courthouse, 491 Steeles Ave. E.”
Meed Ward reports that: Sean Baird has been charged with:
Uttering a Forged Document – Contrary to section 368(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada;
Fraud over $5000 – Contrary to section 380(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada; and
Corrupt Practice (four counts) – Contrary to the Municipal Elections Act.
She adds in her Tweet that: Court dates and schedules can be checked through this link up to a week in advance: https://www.ontariocourtdates.ca (agree to terms on the main page and select Milton).
 Mayor Marianne Meed Ward. “We will continue to share public information with the community when we learn about it as this case moves through the court system. I am thankful to the police investigating and laying charges in any matter that has the potential to undermine elections, the foundation of our democracy” said Meed Ward.
What is both interesting and disturbing is that the Gazette has been communicating with both the Ontario Province Police, who are believed to have carriage of this case, due to the investigative work done by the Anti Rackets Branch (ABR) and the Halton Regional Police Service (HRPS) who are still doing local investigations.
The ABR appear to have lost their tongues; the person we talked to said someone would get back to us.
We heard from the HRPS asking what we knew. We referred them to the Gazette where we have reported consistently on this case well before the Mayor made it a police matter.
Everything you want to know is still on the web site.
The disturbing part of all this is that the Mayor is releasing information that should be public knowledge. The first bit of information on Baird and the Provincial Police came out in an OPP media release saying they were looking for Baird.
Is the Mayor of Burlington now the mouth piece for the OPP? How long has the Mayor had this information? And who gave it to her?
There is an interesting cast of characters on the stage. A former Mayor, a former Member of Parliament and a former candidate for Mayor and Regional Chair.
The question is – who put Baird up to creating numbered corporations and what is he prepared to tell the police? Or was a developer with a development application before Local Planning Act Tribunal (LPAT) the cheque book behind all this?
 By Staff
January 8th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
 It began just before Christmas and has proven to be popular.
The overwhelming success and response of the summer 30/60 Play Challenge, led the city to launching the first ever 30/60 Play Challenge Winter Edition.
The exciting and fun activities will inspire and motivate families and friends to get outside and challenge each other to complete the tasks during the winter months.
Teams can qualify for a draw prize by completing at least 30 activities in 60 days. 21 random winners will be chosen from the teams who successfully complete 30 activities and a grand prize of a $100 Recreation Services gift card will go to the person/team with the most points.
Contest closes at midnight on Feb. 18, 2020
Individuals, teams or families can register by downloading the app HERE.
Examples of activities participants can choose from include:
• Skating
• Tobogganing
• Skiing
• Hiking
• Build a snowman
• Make a snow angel
The Summer 30/60 challenge had 97 teams/individuals participate with the grand prize team completing 153 activities.
Those who participated in the summer challenge had this to say:
“As a new citizen of Burlington, I thought this was a great way to get people to become better acquainted with their city.”
“We have loved the challenges! The kids are going to be in withdrawal tomorrow (“You mean there’s no more after today??”) We have enjoyed strategizing with friends and the thrill of finding new places we have never seen. Thanks so much and hope there will be more Goose Chases!!”
“Congratulations to all the winners! Such a fantastic way to spend part of the summer vacation with the kids. We discovered so many great spots in Burlington.”
For more information or to download the app, CLICK HERE.
By Pepper Parr
January 8th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
There is often a high degree of tension between a ward Councillor and those who are both active and passionate about their community.
With almost every ward having a new council member there is bound to be some friction between the residents who were close to abused by the previous council and the new council member who is still learning the ropes.
 Greg Woodruff said he thinks the public input was sadly lacking on the 92 Plains Road development application – Ward Councillor doesn’t see it quite that way. Last week Greg Woodruff, a former candidate for the Regional Chair and for the office of Mayor in 2018, wrote an opinion piece in which he set out his concerns with the practice some developers have gotten into the practice of taking their applications to LPAT as fast as they can. His Opinion piece is linked at the bottom of this piece.
Kelvin Galbraith responded to several questions the Gazette put to him with the following: “As is the case with the 92 Plains Road site and other similar developments that have gone to LPAT, the public consultation and input has been used to form the final application that is being considered by staff and LPAT.
“The fact that some of the public’s input was not considered is usually because of a difference of opinion or that the planning rational by our professional planning staff could not support the request. Should the public have new information to form opposition to the development, they would have the opportunity to become a participant in the LPAT hearing.
 Kelven Galbraith had a solid handle on what the people of Aldershot were looking for – they don’t all agree with each other which puts him in an awkward spot from time to time,. “At a settlement hearing, staff are not there to defend residents or participants. Planning staff have contributed to the settlement agreement and by this time it has been also endorsed by council so opposing the settlement at this stage would not make sense.”
Galbraith adds that: “There is a new pre-application process that adds another layer of public engagement when it comes to development applications. I would argue that this improves public input opportunities and assists with the tight timelines that we are now facing and hopefully prevents more applications from being appealed for lack of decision before the deadline.
“At some point in a development application a decision needs to be made. There will always be some opposition but we need to make decisions as staff and council that are best for the community. Much work and expense of the taxpayer are afforded to files that go the LPAT route. Negotiating a settlement as opposed to taking our chances with an adjudicator, allows our staff to offer their professional planning rational and come to some conclusion of the file and not prolong further expense. “
Galbraith points out that he is “not sure how the old council worked but I can say that I have offered a fresh set of eyes on every situation that I have encountered. Development is going to occur and Aldershot is seeing lots of interest and activity surrounding the Go station and Plains road. Many that I speak to in the community do not want empty lots, strip clubs and motels that currently hinder the success of our main street. I feel we are in an awkward period of transition between our old highway and a new urban strip of vibrancy with successful businesses and people living close to the amenities.”
Related Opinion piece
Woodruff on LPAT hearings: they are a total fraud.
 By Pepper Parr
January 7th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The event is getting as much promotion as a Boxing Day Sale.
The city is clearly going to do a full Monty on this one – will they drag people in off the street to pack the Council Chamber on the 16th?
The public got treated to the Official Minutes for the December 16th meeting of Council at which they:
Receive and file Community Planning Department report PB-89-19 regarding Taking a Closer Look at the Downtown concept discussion; and
Direct the Director of Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility that, in planning the recommended concept for the downtown based on good planning principles and practices, consideration be given to reducing the heights in the Brant Street Corridor, downtown east side, Locust Street and the foot of Lakeshore Road/Burlington Avenue; and that the overall densities more closely align with the minimum target of 200 people or jobs per hectare; and that the calculations of people/jobs per hectare (total and density) for the preferred concept be included in the final report, including estimations of Old Lakeshore Road and Waterfront Hotel (based on current Official Plan permissions).
One wants to read that Staff Direction very carefully – and then when we see the report later this week try and determine if Staff delivered
 Don Fletcher – delegated  Lynn Crosbie and Blair Smith – delegated Next Steps
On Thursday, Jan. 16, 2020, at a meeting on the Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility Committee, City staff will present a recommended land use vision and concept for the future built form of the downtown to Burlington City Council.
Meeting details:
Thursday, Jan. 16, 2020
1 p.m.
City Hall, Council Chambers, second floor, 426 Brant St.
A copy of report PL-02-20, containing the recommendation, will be available to the public online on Thursday, Jan. 9, 2020 at getinvolvedburlington.ca. A notification email will be sent to let you know the report is available.
Visit getinvolvedburlington.ca to:
• View the recommended concept
• Read the evaluation of the two preliminary concepts, from fall 2019
• Learn more about how you can register to speak to Council as a delegate at the Jan. 16 meeting.
If you have any questions, please contact Alison Enns, Project Manager at 905-335-7600, ext. 7787.
 Mayor Meed Ward listening to delegations.  Angelo Benivegna – tangling with a delegation. If you delegated at the Dec. 5, 2019 committee meeting about the re-examination of the downtown policies in the adopted Official Plan, we would appreciate hearing about your experience. Please take a few minutes to complete a delegation survey.
By Pepper Parr
January 7th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
It took them long enough but this afternoon the Burlington Economic Development Corporation announced the appointment of Anita Cassidy as Executive Director effective January 1, 2020.
 Anita Cassidy – Executive Director – Burlington Economic Development Corporation Anita has been in the role of Acting Executive Director since May 2018 when former Executive Director Frank McKeown retired. Anita has over 15 years of experience in Economic Development delivering results-oriented strategies and programs that drive economic growth. She first joined Burlington Economic Development in 2011 and has since led a number of important projects.
There is a lot more to say about the role she has and the challenges she faces – for today – Congratulations Anita – you earned this one.
 By Staff
January 7th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
They are throwing the doors wide open and inviting the public to tour the existing quarry any Thursday afternoon.
Great way to let people see and get a sense of what the BIG plan is for an industrial site that has not always had a positive public following.
The Nelson Quarry is now opening its doors to the public every Thursday afternoon throughout 2020.
 A 200 acre parcel of land on the south side of Second Line will be deeded to the city the day the quarry agreement is extended. The shaded area to the left has the potential to become a beach area and a small lake. “Over the past few months we have seen a lot of interest in our expansion plans and our vision for turning the site into a park over 30 years,” said Nelson President Quinn Moyer. “And there’s no better way to understand what we’re planning than to see it first-hand.”
Visitors can enter the quarry from the second exit off Guelph Line from noon until 3pm. Tours will be arranged at the front desk of the main office building. Parties of more than three are asked to call ahead to book a reservation.
The Mt. Nemo quarry has played an important role as Burlington’s main source of limestone for more than 50 years. Its aggregate forms the foundation of most roads, buildings and infrastructure in Burlington.
A proposal is underway to expand the quarry over the next 30 years, and to donate the rehabilitated land in parcels over that time to form the largest park in Burlington.
The proposed park would be nearly six times larger than Burlington’s City View Park. The size and scale of the park would allow for abundant recreational opportunities, from biking and swimming to rock climbing and soccer.
 The evolution of a quarry pit into a place for people is not something one sees very often. Many quarry operators walk when they have taken all they can out of a site. Nelson Aggregates is doing it differently – and doing as much as it can to involve the wider community. To find out more go to www.mtnemoquarrypark.com
Address: 2433 No. 2 Sideroad, Burlington
Reservation Number: 905-335-5345
 By Pepper Parr
January 7th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
Burlington is fortunate to have the community organizations it has. Three that were formed within the last three years have brought about profound change.
 A bus snazzy bus shelter does not equal a transit hub – even if there is a tiny ticket office across the street. ECoB (Engaged Citizens of Burlington) organized debates in every ward of the city during the 2018 municipal election, with precious little help from the city’s administration.
We Love Burlington worked with We Love Oakville to ensure that the Provincial Review of local government was made public and that a Burlington voice was heard. The “Lovelies” would very much like to see the report to the Minister which appears to be what dissuaded him from making any changes to the organization structure of the Region of Halton.
 Plan B wants to make sure that the entrance to Spencer Smith Park is as grand as the view of the lake – and that a replacement for the aged Waterfront Hotel doesn’t gobble up all that space. Plan B is focused on what gets done with the land the Waterfront Hotel is located on. There are plans to demolish the hotel and erect something a lot higher. Plan B wants to ensure that the interests of the citizens of the city are protected; they were not convinced that the city council in place when the development application was filed would ensure that there was a clear sight line from Brant Street through to the Pier and Lake Ontario nor do they appear to believe that the Planning department is going to do what anyone you ask would want to see.
All three organization have written an Open Letter to city Council and the provincial elected officials setting out their argument for changes in the Staff report that is going to a Statutory meeting on January 14th.
That report is complex and there is some doubt in the mind of this writer that every member of Council has actually read the report and that they understand its implications.
The Open Letter is pretty direct, makes a lot of sense and is very well argued.
The community organizations, ECoB in particular, were one of the, if not the biggest, citizen groups that got this city council elected. It behooves Council to listen very closely to ensure that the Planning department understands what the will of council means.
As an aside, there was a point when Mayor Meed Ward had to state publicly that the Planning department Grow Bold concept was no longer on the table and that Planning staff were not to refer to the concept in the future.
The expiry date for the Interim Control ByLaw (ICBL) is early March. An extension is possible but would be exceptionally unfair to the development community. One developer has experienced a revenue delay of millions due to a site approval that could not be given due to the bylaw.
The Open Letter asks council to defer the Land Use report; should council do so it must be for a very very short period of time to ensure that the ICBL is lifted before early March.
All the gains that were made with the election of a significantly different city council will be lost if the matters pointed out in the Open Letter are not dealt with. The election of the new city council was a turning point for the city – let us not lose what has been gained.
Related news stories:
The Open Letter
 Change: It has been going on for the last six years – the Pier in this picture wasn’t completed; the Riviera was still in place and the original Gazebo was still standing in Spencer Smith Park A new round of changes are now before us. By Pepper Parr
January 7th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
Those who watch what happens at city hall are focused on two critical meetings that will take place next week.
One on Tuesday and one on Thursday.
The Tuesday meeting has been covered before – links to that event – the Land Use Study – are below.
The Thursday meeting, which starts at 1:00 pm – has the working title: Taking a Closer Look at the Downtown.
This focuses on what the Planning Department thinks should be permitted in the different precincts in the city.
A precinct is a boundary created by planners that has height and density permission permitted along with zoning.
Planning staff have been working on this report for some time. Working with a group of consultants Staff came back with two different concepts of what the different precincts would look like with the height and density ideas that had been developed. Illustrations of what came out of the first round of ideas from the planners is shown below.
The response from that group of people who pay attention to these things was “underwhelming”.
After getting a bit of a rough ride from most of the delegations Staff was to take away what they heard from the public and the reaction they got from city council and return with what is being referred as the “preferred” concept.
 Alison Enns, part of the Team that Took a Closer Look at the Downtown on a tour with a group of citizens. The public will get to see “a recommended land use vision and concept for downtown Burlington.”
The city puts the event this way: “Discussion about the re-examination of the downtown policies in the adopted Official Plan will continue at a meeting of Burlington City Council’s Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility Committee meeting on Thursday, Jan. 16, 2020 starting at 1 p.m.
“City staff will present a single recommended land use vision and concept for the future built form of downtown Burlington. The recommendation is based on the evaluation of two preliminary concepts presented for public feedback in fall 2019, which was informed by several inputs including public feedback, technical studies, and an understanding of existing and approved development in the downtown.”
 Heather MacDonald – leads the Planning Team at City Hall. A copy of the report PL-02-20, containing the recommendation, will be available to the public online on Thursday, Jan. 9, 2020 at getinvolvedburlington.ca.
We will be giving that report a very close read and reporting on it.
Heather MacDonald, Executive Director of Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility said she “looks forward to developing the detailed policies that will implement Council’s decision on the endorsed land use vision and built form concept for downtown.”
Background:
• Early in 2019, Burlington City Council directed City staff to re-examine the downtown policies in Burlington’s adopted Official Plan, including the height and density of buildings. As part of this work, the City hosted a series of public engagement opportunities designed to give the community the chance to provide meaningful input on the community’s vision for the downtown, both online and in person.
 A concept for Brant Street looking towards the lake. .. the differences  …are the amount of setback from the street and the height that is to be permitted. • The first phase of public engagement, from August to September 2019, identified 13 themes that the public felt were important to reflect in the planning for downtown. These themes were used by SGL Planning and Design to inform the development of two concepts that show two possible ways downtown Burlington could accommodate growth and development in the future. In the second phase of public engagement in October and November 2019, the City presented these two concepts to the public for discussion. Participants were asked what they liked and did not like about these two concepts. The feedback on the two concepts, along with a number of other inputs, has been used to inform the development of a single recommended concept for downtown Burlington that will be presented to Burlington City Council on Jan. 16, 2020.
• Council’s decision on Jan. 16 will set the stage for the next phase of the project, which is to develop detailed policies that will implement and support the land use vision and built form concept endorsed by Council. All of the public feedback heard throughout the project will inform policy development. While some of the public feedback heard to date has already informed the development of the recommended vision and concept, other feedback will be applied in the development of detailed policies. The policies will be recommended to Council in Spring 2020 for endorsement as modifications to the 2018 adopted Official Plan.
• A vote to endorse any changes to the policies that will guide development in the downtown until 2031 will be made by Burlington City Council in Spring 2020.
By Staff
January 7th, 2020
Whitby, ON –
Officially it is known as ASE – Automated Speed Enforcement. Photo radar to the rest of us.
The NDP government brought it in in 1993.
Mike Harris killed it within a week of taking office.
The Ford government brought it back but for use just in school zones.
The Ontario Traffic Council (OTC) today announced its support for and endorsement of the program via the launch of Driving Safer Communities, a campaign to raise awareness of the use of ASE to reduce speeds in school zones and Community Safety Zones where the posted speed limit is under 80 kmph.
 Coming to a street near you. Over the past two and a half years, the OTC has worked alongside its participating municipalities as well as the Ministry of Transportation to develop a transparent, consistent and sustainable ASE program that is designed to change driver behaviour in order to increase speed compliance in school zones and community safety zones. With the regulation giving Ontario’s municipalities the ability to adopt new and enhanced tools such as ASE to promote road safety in these designated areas, Ontarians can expect to see ASE systems deployed across the province as early as this spring.
The Driving Safer Communities campaign, comprised of a microsite at www.ASEOntario.com, including a comprehensive list of FAQs, is designed to ensure the public is well educated about the benefits of this important speed reduction tool and how vehicle owners may be affected. In addition, the OTC has launched a campaign Facebook page at @ASEONT to provide the public with access to a platform for engaging in important dialogue about road safety.
An automated system that uses a camera and a speed measurement device, ASE is one of many methods used – along with engineering activities, education initiatives and police enforcement – to enforce speed limits in areas with vulnerable populations. Participating municipalities will implement ASE technology via a data-driven approach that reflects information they have been capturing in their own communities including the exposure of vulnerable road users in relation to vehicles; prior collisions; zone environment such as the location of schools, bridges, bicycle paths, etc.; speed data; public input; and enforcement input with this data used to identify locations where speed is a factor in road and pedestrian safety.
For example, 2018 data from the City of Toronto demonstrates that in just one week more than 50,000 drivers were identified going over the posted speed limit of 30 kmph along Rockcliffe Blvd, which is in a Community Safety Zone, with the maximum speed clocked at 156 kmph. And 2019 data from Niagara Region shows the critical need to address speeding in school zones and Community Safety Zones with more than 25,000 and 100,000 drivers identified going over the posted speed limit of 50 kmph along Pelham and Montrose Roads, respectively.
“Despite speed being a contributing factor in approximately one third of fatal collisions across Canada, data being collected by municipalities across the province clearly demonstrates that vehicles are continuing to speed,” said Geoff Wilkinson, executive director, OTC. “On behalf of the OTC, and our members, we wholeheartedly endorse the province’s implementation of ASE, and to further support the program we have launched the Driving Safer Communities campaign to ensure Ontario residents are well informed about this safety tool as a proven method for enforcing the posted speed limits in school zones and community safety zones.”
 This is what Toronto is using – might be the same type for Burlington. Toronto, Ottawa, Brampton and Niagara Region will be the first of Ontario’s municipalities to implement ASE with several other municipalities also anticipated to follow in the coming months including Burlington, London, Durham Region, Mississauga, Peel Region and York Region, among others. Clear ASE signage will be posted everywhere ASE is placed including signs installed prior to the issuance of tickets to provide motorists with a warning that ASE systems will be coming to each specific location.
“With the most recent Ontario Road Safety Annual Report from the Ministry of Transportation showing that the number of people killed in Ontario in speed-related collisions increased by 13 per cent from 2015 to 2016, there is no better time for the launch of the OTC’s Driving Safer Communities campaign to raise awareness of ASE and support its use in locations where speed is a proven factor in road and pedestrian safety,” said Peter Sejrup, staff sergeant, Peterborough Police Service and director, OTC. “Ultimately, this is about safety and adhering to the posted speed limit is the law. We welcome ASE to Ontario’s school zones and Community Safety Zones as an effective way to improve road user safety.”
About the Ontario Traffic Council
The Ontario Traffic Council (OTC) is a leading voice in multi-modal transportation in Ontario, offering diverse expertise in traffic engineering, transportation planning, safety and traffic enforcement. Established in 1950, the association was created to improve traffic management in Ontario by drawing on the knowledge and expertise of those in the field of enforcement, engineering and education.
Today, the organization promotes excellence in the multi-modal transportation field through education, guidance and sharing expertise supported by its members across Ontario regions, cities, towns, counties and industry businesses (consultants and vendors). Membership also includes individuals who have an interest in and responsibility for traffic and active transportation engineering, planning and road user safety including engineers, planners, police services, parking enforcement, other municipal staff and elected representatives.
By Staff
January 7th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
 Samantha Allen – safe and sound The Halton Regional Police Service advised media that Samantha Jean Allen, 29 was located safe and sound on Monday, January 6th, 2020.
The Police Service had asked for public help in locating the young woman who had been missing since December 13th.
All is well – with perhaps some explaining to do.
An Open Letter
TO: Marianne Meed ward, Councillors Kelvin Galbraith, Lisa Kearns, Rory Nissan, Shawna stolte, Paul Sharman, Angel Bentivegna
Copied to: MPP Jane McKenna, MPP Effie Triantafilopoulos, Hamilton Spectator, Toronto Star, Burlington Post, Burlington Gazette, Bay Observer.
Re: Burlington Community Planning Department Report PL-01-20
(Including ICBL Land Use Study Report)
Having reviewed the above mentioned report, we the undersigned Burlington community groups wish to make the following requests of city council members.
We are encouraged by one of the primary findings of Dillon’s report, which concludes, as our groups have argued for some time, that the John Street Bus Terminal is not located on a priority Transit Corridor, nor is it supported by higher order transit, nor frequent transit within a dedicated right-of-way, and that it is not functioning as a major bus depot based on common characteristics of typical major bus depots.
Given the narrow rights-of-way downtown, the function of the John Street Bus terminal will not change. Simply put, the John Street bus terminal is not, and will never be, a Major Transit Station area (MTSA).
The report has made it clear, that the Region classified the John Street Bus terminal as an MTSA in their ROPA 38 in 2009, that Burlington must conform to Regional & Provincial Planning Policy, to the extent that it cannot delineate or establish densities for MTSAs.
It also has been noted that local official plan policies can provide clarity on how provincial or regional plans, policies and definitions will be implemented within the local context of its municipality. We must not lose sight of the fact that the local Official Plan remains the most important vehicle for implementation of Ontario’s Provincial Policy Statement. Planning staff have recommended that the John Street bus terminal remain classified as an MTSA despite Dillon’s findings, albeit distinguished from the three MTSAs in Burlington which are served by regional express rail. This recommended use of MTSA designation serves no purpose other than to continue to imply a level of transit infrastructure that does not and can never exist. By doing so, developers will continue to request building densities based on MTSA designations far beyond those appropriate or legislated by provincial or regional policy, and which will never have appropriate levels of transit to support them.
Staff have further claimed that MTSA designation will not increase intensification downtown beyond the current 200 jobs/residents per hectare, because downtown is also designated as an Urban Growth Centre. This claim assumes that the Urban Growth Centre remains as-is downtown, which is far from certain and not what residents want, and is made in spite of the glaring example to the contrary provided by the OMB’s decision to allow a 26-storey building at 374 Martha Street on this basis of the downtown MTSA, against Burlington’s position.
It is apparent from the PL-01-20 report that the Region made an error in classifying the John Street Bus terminal as an MTSA, and we must not propagate the error through Burlington’s Official Plan and supporting policies.
We emphasize that we do not oppose better transit for downtown Burlington. MTSA designation does not create more transit, and arguing for the designation’s urgent removal does not constitute an argument against better transit services. MTSA designation is a development and building density tool, not a tool for better transit.
We, the undersigned organizations, therefore urge members of council sitting as the community planning, regulation & mobility committee, to defer receipt of the ICBL Land Use Study Report on January 14 and to reject the recommendations for Official Plan and Zooming Bylaw Amendments.
Furthermore, we implore the committee and council to take the necessary steps to advise the Region of Halton of their classification error and request that they correct it, and to direct the Burlington Planning Depot to remove any and all references to a downtown MTSA in and through their future official plan and zooming bylaw amendments, including those in PL-01-20.
Respectfully, the undersigned
 
 By Greg Woodruff
January 6th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
That headline is a strong statement but the 92 Plains Rd development is a case in point:
Planning department Staff did not come back to Council with a recommendation on the development application which gave the developer Chelten Developments Inc. an automatic Local Planning Act Tribunal hearing.
Tom Muir, also an Aldershot resident, has raised the issue of the Planning department repeatedly letting this happen: no accountability ever occurs. The current council has done nothing to address this issue. I’ve asked several times if Staff are attending LPAT hearings and if residents can get a heads up on what they are going to present. They don’t respond.
Currently, residents have no idea what the staff might present until the development application has already been settled and heading to LPAT. Council has done nothing on this practice.
 The development was originally for four stories of housing – the application was revised to six. In the 92 Plains case, Tom Muir was able to get participant status at the hearing with a couple of other residents. Muir submitted several well-reasoned arguments as to process and development compatibility. He was doing the job Staff should have been doing. Some Planning Staff did attended the hearing but said nothing at that time.
Staff, who are paid by the residents through their taxes, should be on the side of truth or basic reality and represent the interests of the residents, assuming this is the will of council.
Because of the structure and process used by LPAT only people with accepted professional designations can give testimony. Staff have those designations. The developers have planners with the required designations. Staff chooses to be mute so the developer’s “land use planner” is then the only “planner” presenting evidence.
Muir, who consistently provides reams of evidence, which gets put into the file but is never heard at the hearing, because he is not a “land use planner”. If Burlington staff said the exact same words it would be “testimony” and the tribunal would have to take these points into consideration. However, since they don’t, the developer’s testimony is “uncontested”. The LPAT makes their decision based on what they hear and because there was evidence and testimony from just the one land use planner the LPAT Commissioner has to side with the evidence presented by the developer’s representative.
An LPAT decision made without any input from residents or council becomes just an elaborate farce.
It’s hard to tell if the LPAT system works or not; the negligence on the city’s part is staggering. Not only do they bungle the application by letting it go to LPAT because there was no decision within the required time frame. City staff doesn’t even say anything at the LPAT hearing. They could defend the settlement by backing up participants when the developer’s land use planner makes misleading statements.
 Woodruff: This requirement was to take a point in the far end of the go station parking lot, not the entrance which is 600 m away. That staff offers nothing at LPAT matters immensely because there is no evaluation of anything. The developer can just say anything true or not, real or not. For example, the developer said the development was within 500 m of the GO station. This requires them to take a point in the far end of the go station parking lot, not the entrance which is 600 m away. Would this have made any difference?
No one knows because the staff presented nothing. What residents present doesn’t matter. This because we are not “land-use planners” and cannot afford one.
Now we can get into an interesting discussion. Is the the city just insanely incompetent or is it deliberately “throwing the game”. The take-home point is “engagement” or “consultation” has nothing to do with what gets built. You either get planning staff to defend residents or we don’t have any say on development at all.
I have seen nothing that leads me to believe staff is doing anything differently than they were doing in the last administration. Nor, have I seen anything from the current council that directs staff to behave differently. Thus we are currently getting what we were getting from the old council.
That the LPAT system certainly sucks does not let the council off the hook. They don’t appear to be even trying to work the system. If the city was doing all that could be reasonably expected to give at least lip service to will of residents. However, the current new council is just working the will of the old council.
Putting the development in context. Content taken from the developers application:
In 2008 the City of Burlington released its “Intensification Study” which intended to provide preliminary residential and employment intensification estimates to 2031 in support of the Sustainable Halton Plan. Within the study, Plains Road is identified as an “Urban Growth Corridor”
Staff outlined that there was potential for approximately 3,750 dwelling units and 7,500 residents along these particular growth corridors. The available GO Stations were an important component of the corridors, and these areas were identified as being suitable for higher intensity development. These figures were based on an estimate that indicated that future developments or redevelopments would be made up of 60% residential, 30% mixed use, and 10% retail/service commercial.
The owner has proposed to redevelop the subject site for a six storey, 49 unit apartment building with ground floor office/commercial uses.
The proposed building will front onto and have pedestrian access to the pedestrian network on Plains Road East. Vehicular access to the subject site and development will be maintained along Plains Road East.
The proposal will also be accessible via a mixture of public transit modes; the Aldershot GO Station is located within 500 m of the proposal (walking distance). Burlington Transit route 1(1x) provides east and west services along Plains Road, and is accessible just west of Birchwood Avenue, and immediately north of the subject lands on the north side of Plains Road East.
 Greg Woodruff taking part in a Mayoralty debate broadcast by TVOntario
Take home points:
1) We need Council to change direction and insist that Staff defend the plans Council passes.
2) Tom Muir has basically done the work the planning department should have done.
3) Presently unelected LPAT Commissioner and developer consultants are deciding if we get to keep trees, stores, grass and sunlight in our community.
Greg Woodruff is an Aldershot resident who works as a web site developer. He ran for the Regional Chair in 2010 and for Mayor of Burlington in 2018.
By Marty Staz
January 6th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
From everything we read, although still little of what we see, it would appear that 2019 has brought the kind of change to our City that we all expected when our new Council was elected. I’m talking about how our City will grow.
 Staz looking over mid rise development guidelines released by the Planing department. But the question that I believe stands in the forefront, is it the kind of change that we need and want, and have the property alternatives for growth really been considered? I realize it was too late for three monster buildings downtown, but we still hear of the same thing being the main topics of discussion at City Hall, and now there is talk of approving a 27 floor tower on the football at Lakeshore and Martha in return for a small piece of parkland. The truth is all we ever hear of is high rise towers being the solution to our growth. We can’t even consider single detached homes being part of our growth solution.
We saw a grand total of 495 newly built detached homes in our City in 2019 which doesn’t come close to addressing the problem.
What about the “Missing Middle”? This is something I have advocated for in the past and it is something that should be considered as a solution to our population growth. It would provide mid-range and affordable housing and put the brakes on turning our City into a maze of high rise tunnels.
 Marty Staz a Chamber of Commerce member most of his professional life. In a study done by Evergreen and the Canadian Urban Institute, the Missing Middle describes a range of housing types between single-detached houses and apartment buildings that have gone ‘missing’ from many of our cities in the last 60 to 70 years. The difference for Burlington is that we are in the process of creating a City that WILL be losing its middle, and at our current rate a lot faster than 60-70 years.
To clarify, what I am really talking about is homes that range from town-homes, 4-6 storey apartment buildings, laneway homes and triplex, fourplex type of homes. Homes that are capable of providing the 3 bedroom homes that growing families will need. Go ahead and look at the proposals of the towers currently approved and see how many units provide anything over 2 bedrooms. Go ahead and ask the future generation of homeowners where their ultimate dream home lies.
It is definitely not on the 24th floor with 2 bedrooms. They want to be able to walk out their door to their driveway or to a backyard.
 The Green Belt in the Escarpment does not permit residential housing except in the settlement areas of Lowville and Kilbride and even there development is very limited. Half of Burlington’s land mass is zoned rural. No affordable homes in this part of the city. The other consideration is affordability which must include a balanced mix of owned and rental homes. Of course a big challenge for our City is that land prices in our area, since we are land locked by the Greenbelt, are certainly not coming down. This is the argument many put forth to give credence to the high-rise solution. It’s going to take everyone from the public, private and non-profit sectors to come together to take a much deeper dive into how our City looks in the next 50 years.
 Good housing in stable neighbourhoods – and affordable.  Housing has to be within a stable community – and affordable. The bottom line here is that our City is at a crossroads. We have already stepped across the line. Before it’s too late we need to make some hard decisions that will make people want to stay in our City and move to our City because they see a better place to live. Isn’t that what Burlington has always been about?
Marty Staz retired from the printing business got into real estate and then found himself a candidate in the October 2018 municipal election as a candidate in ward 1. He is an active member of the Chamber of Commerce
Background link:
The Missing Middle report: Click here
 By Pepper Parr
January 4TH, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
What happens if you don’t pay your taxes – and how many people don’t pay their taxes?
 Joan Ford, City Treasurer In a recent report to city Council Joan Ford, City Treasurer reported that:
The City of Burlington collects property taxes for the city, Region of Halton and the Halton Boards of Education as legislated under the Municipal Act, 2001
The total 2019 tax levy is $420.6 million compared to $409.8 million in 2018.
The status of property tax collection as of September 30th, 2019 was:
Collections for the current taxation year are 93.6%, which is consistent with prior years as highlighted in the chart below.
What does the city do when taxes due are not paid?
Arrears notices are sent four times per year to aid in collections. In addition to arrears notices, tax collection letters are sent to owners with arrears in both the current year and two previous years; business properties are sent letters in the first quarter and residential properties in the second quarter.
A property title search is undertaken in November on accounts with three years of arrears and any lenders are notified. This results in most accounts being paid.
For those properties that remain three years in arrears, the Municipal Act, 2001 allows for a tax sale process to begin in January. The owner or any interested party has one year to pay out the tax arrears. If arrears remain after the one year period, the city may proceed with a municipal tax sale. Since 2000 there have been seven tax sales in Burlington.
The city offers multiple payment options including three pre-authorized payment plans which provide a convenient and reliable payment method for property owners. Approximately one third (20,000) of all property accounts are enrolled in pre-authorized payment plans.
One doesn’t get extensions like that with a bank loan.
 By Pepper Parr
January 3rd, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
 Miller works well with students – he can remember the names of students he taught science to 20 years ago. At heart he is a teacher. For Halton District School Board Director of Education Stuart Miller, 2019 was not an easy year.
The labour issues, that are ongoing, and the penny pinching at Queen’s Park has created confusion and havoc. The one positive part of all this for Miller is the “very good working relationship we have with the local union groups”. It is the larger province wide collective agreement part that is troubling.
This government looks at education quite a bit differently than the previous government. Burlington gets a very disproportionate share of funding from the province based on population and student size.
 The first public information meeting drew 1000 people to Aldershot high school. Despite the drawbacks Miller can point to some significant successes – the launch of the iSTEM program at Aldershot High School has been a resounding success. So much so that Miller thinks the Board might be able to offer a similar program for the new high school being built in Milton and scheduled to open in 2021.
The Board is still working at finding ways to partner with other organizations in the Region – not much to report at that level.
Miller needs a new administration building but has not managed to get the support he needs from the community at large and the trustees haven’t found a way to make the case with the public.
The Board has the land in Burlington – at the intersection of Upper Middle Road and Guelph Line; Miller needs a partner who can build what is needed and had hoped someone could come forward with a proposal.
 MMR principal Claire Proteau pointing to some of the changes being made in the school when the Pearson high school students became part of MMR The upheaval created when the decision was made to close two of Burlington’s seven high schools in 2017 has worked itself out. The merger of the Lester B. Pearson population with that of MM Robinson has gone exceptionally well, due in large measure to the work done by MMR principal Claire Proteau and Superintendent Terri Blackwell. They understood the need to work with the parents and students at both schools and make them a part of the process that everyone had to go through.
 The Bateman parents were passionate about keeping their school open – closing was as much a political issue as it was a student population issue. The merger of the Bateman and Nelson high schools hasn’t gone as well; the fight to keep Bateman open lasted much longer – many thought the wrong school was being closed. Space had to be created at Nelson for the Bateman students – that work is underway now.
The Bateman high school site has yet to be declared as surplus to the Board’s needs. When that decision is made the Board has to first make the property available to a legislated list of institutions. Burlington Mayor Marianne Meed Ward has plans for the space and HDSB trustee Amy Collard, who fought valiantly to keep the high school open, wants it used by the community. The building has an indoor swimming pool that the city Parks and Recreation people make significant use of. The fear that the building would be torn down and turned into a condo site is not in the cards.
The International Baccalaureate program that was at Bateman has already moved to Central where it is doing very well.
While the iSTEM program at Aldershot is a runaway success – the HDSB is not doing as well with trades training – at a time when the needs for men and woman in the trades is not being met. That is a challenge to which this school board and many others in the province have not yet figured out how to meet.
The HDSB was at one point the sponsor of The Centre for Skills Development that delivers free government-funded programs and fee-based programs to help people at various stages of life (youth, job seekers, second career seekers and newcomers to Canada) get on a path to career success.
That organization went on to become an arms length part of the board and then became a separate entity that the Board is no longer part of. The Centre appears to be doing a good job of serving the needs of the commercial-industrial sector.
 Stephen Lewis, probably the most passionate speaker in the country was to speak at a Human Rights Symposium – a teacher strike meant cancellation. The event is scheduled to take place in 2020. A major 2019 disappointment for Miller was the need to cancel the day long Human Rights Symposium that was to feature Stephen Lewis and Michel Chikwanine. Miller told the Gazette that he has been able to convince Lewis and Chikwanine to take part in the 2020 Symposium – the 2019 event had to be cancelled when the teachers used the scheduled date to strike.
The Symposium has Miller’s signature all over it. It was his idea and he has been the driving force behind it; Superintendent Rob Eatough was in place to make it actually happen. The Trustees, who give Miller a lot of latitude, quite frankly they don’t really hold him to account – not that there is any need to, Miller delivers, but the Trustees are there to ask the hard questions; few of those are heard at the Halton District School Board.
 Stuart Miller Miller became Director of Education six years ago on a five year contract that was extended for a year and might get an additional extension. Miller is far too young to think in terms of retirement but he does have something he wants to do up his sleeve. He just wasn’t ready to show that card during our conversation.
|
|
