 By Staff
February 19th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
 The Halton Regional Police is warning citizens against several telephone scams that are operating within the region. Over the past few weeks, residents have reported receiving calls with the following themes:
Scam #1:
Caller indicates they are from the CRA (Canadian Revenue Agency) and that you owe money for taxes. In some cases, the suspect tells the victim a warrant will be obtained and they will be arrested if they do not make an immediate payment. Payment is requested in the form of gift cards that are not traceable (Amazon, iTunes, Google Play). The victim attends a store, purchases a large quantity of gift cards and gives the caller the personal identification number (PIN) or verification number.
Scam #2:
Caller indicates they are from your bank and need help to investigate an internal fraud between the bank and another retail store. You have been selected to assist with the investigation and could earn up to $500.00 for your help. The caller then directs you to purchase a large quantity of gift cards (Amazon, iTunes, Google Play, Walmart) and call them back with the PIN. You are told where to purchase the gift cards and cautioned not to disclose the reason or directed to say you are purchasing the cards as gifts for your children or grandchildren. Suspect may also gain remote access to victim’s computer (online banking). The promised deposit appears in their daily banking account; however, it is transferred from victim’s line of credit/savings unbeknownst to victim.
Scam #3:
Caller identifying themselves as a bank employee and advises you that one of your credit cards has been compromised. The caller indicates they will deposit a large sum of money into your account (much larger than what you are alleged to have lost), however, you are asked to transfer back a portion of the money. Suspect may gain remote access to victim’s computer (online banking). The promised deposit appears in their daily banking account; however, it is transferred from victim’s line of credit/savings unbeknownst to victim.
Scam #4:
Caller indicates they are with some type of police or other law enforcement agency, or a lawyer representing a loved one (they will often use a grandchild and elicit a promise “not to tell” anyone). The caller directs you to initiate a money transfer. The caller is often asking for thousands of dollars to “post bail” for your loved one. Older adults are often the target of this scam because they want to help their grandchild.
Please be aware of the following:
• No government agency, financial institution or legitimate business is ever going to ask you to make payment in gift cards, money transfers or wires.
• No government agency, financial institution or legitimate business would give you money and ask for a portion to be reimbursed.
• No government agency, financial institution or legitimate business is ever going to ask you to assist them in an internal fraud or similar style investigation.
• No law enforcement agency, bailiff or lawyer will contact you asking for bail money to be wire transferred.
If you are ever in doubt, please contact the police for assistance. Please safeguard yourself and your loved ones by discussing these scams and what to do when a call like this is received. If you suspect you have been contacted by a scam, hang up immediately.
 By Pepper Parr
February 19th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The site is just yards away from where Marianne Meed Ward officially threw her hat into the ring for the office of Mayor. Months later she sits in an office on the eight floor of city hall.
 Meed Ward supporters indicating which ward they lived in – representatives from every ward were there. Her campaign was about sensible, responsible development. She spoke to a small, enthusiastic audience at the top of Clearview Avenue overlooking the site on which the ADI Development Group is building what will amount to a new neighbourhood that will align with the mobility hub, the plans for which have yet to be finalized.
An application has been made to change the Official Plan designation to High Density Residential to allow the development of a mid-rise, 6-storey apartment building, with 160 dwelling units at a density of 258 units per hectare. A rezoning application has also been made to change the corresponding zoning to a site specific Residential High Density RH1.
  The lands are currently designated as low density residential in the City’s Official Plan which allows for detached and semi-detached dwellings, and other forms of ground oriented housing not exceeding 25 units per hectare. The lands are zoned R2.1 in the City’s Zoning By-law which allows for detached dwellings and an accessory dwelling unit within a detached dwelling.
A date for the first public meeting has not yet been set.
 By Jim Young
February 18th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
In recent Gazette articles and comments, Burlington’s 25 Year Strategic Plan, “Grow Bold”, has garnered much criticism of its name and the plausibility of a vague plan that looks 25 years ahead.
 Grow Bold got the boot – the Mayor had to almost push it out the door. The name really doesn’t matter. Call it Grow Bold, Grow Smart or just The 25 Year Plan; having a plan is important. To achieve anything of consequence we need a longer term view of how our city might look in 25 years. That view is necessarily vague and aspirational; who really knows where we will be by then?
 This aerial of the city is going to look a lot different in five years – in a decade you won’t recognize the place, A personal analogy might be a 40 year old planning to retire at 65. How will that retirement look in 25 years? Do I want to travel? Spend time with grandkids? How will I pay my rent? Will I have to keep working? Of course these possibilities may change over the 25 years, but we still need to plan for them. You cannot drive to Florida if your GPS is only programmed to the end of the street. Unless we are extremely lucky, little in life is achieved without a plan. Call this our “Retirement Strategic Plan.”
 The creation of the 2010 -2014 Strategic Plan was a city staff – city council effort that then went to the public. They filled pages of flip chart work but found at the end of the sessions that city staff and council were on different sides of a fence. It was that way for the term and the one that followed. Then we need more specific details: How much should we save and where will that money come from. Will it be RRSPs? Tax Free Savings? Is there a Company Pension? Can I live in my kid’s basement if my Retirement Strategic Plan doesn’t work? This is the meat & potatoes of our planning. Call it our Retirement Official Plan.
Then come the bumps on the road to retirement. When we run into car repairs or the basement floods, when we face short time work or job loss: Changes we must make to our plans. “Amendments to The Retirement Official Plan.” Doubtless we will have contentious domestic debate about these.
Municipalities need plans too. City planners work on at least three levels, with many sub levels in between. The Strategic Plan, The Official Plan and Zoning / Bylaw Amendments to those plans.
 It started out as a four year plan – the term of a city council …. The Strategic Plan: A long term, aspirational view of where we might like to be in 25 years. Obviously no-one really knows where we will be by then; but we must have an idea of how we want our city to evolve over that period. This is the one plan that Burlington consulted citizens on and actually did a reasonable job on.
 … and just sort of grew when a consuklting firm with the compliance of the then city manager took council in a much different direction. The Official Plan; a detailed and much more pertinent document, sets out the steps needed to realize the strategic vision. Mandated by the province for regular review, it re-evaluates the plan to adjust for economic, social, demographic and political shifts that may not be foreseeable but will inevitably take place over 25 years.
This is the plan that should have defined the transit, parking, congestion, intensification plans and area/zone specific heights as they evolved over the next 5 years of that 25 year strategy. Sadly our last City Council failed to provide an Official Plan that met regional requirements and utterly misjudged local sentiment on every level.
Outraged citizens vented their anger in wholesale changes at the last election.
Lastly there are Amendments to the Official Plan and the Zoning Bylaws of that plan. These are often the most contentious and time consuming aspects of city planning. Amendments address those changes to residential, commercial and retail building in our neighbourhoods, which have greatest impact on life and work in our communities.
No matter what the Strategic or Official Plans say about height and density on your street or the plaza at the end of the block, developers can apply to amend the plan or zoning bylaw. These are the matters that are currently the most contentious in our city.
Subject to a 210 day deadline for response by municipalities, there are so many zoning / bylaw amendments active in Burlington that city planners are failing to respond to them in time, opening the door to so many appeals by developers.
These are not failures of the strategic plan. They are failures of process, of consultation and, of course, they must be addressed. In its early actions Council has demonstrated a willingness to address these issues and already there is a feeling that city staff are adapting to this new council paradigm.
We can and should oppose bad planning, we deserve greater say in the plans and the processes, but instead of abandoning the discipline of Strategic Planning, let us work with our new council and city planners to make these plans better. Let us align city plans with citizen visions rather than developer bottom lines in the knowledge that the only thing worse than a Vague Long Term Plan is No Long Term Plan At All.
 Jim Young delegating at city hall. Jim Young is an Aldershot resident who delegates at city Council frequently and has, in a number of cases, given some very wise advice. It was seldom received with much in the way of grace by the 2010 to 2018 city council
 By Pepper Parr
February 18th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
In October 2017, Burlington City Council approved the development application submitted by Roman Home Builders for 2085 Pine St., permitting a five-storey residential building.
Since that time, the ownership of the property has changed. The new owners are working toward submitting a new development application and concept for 2085 Pine St. that will increase the height from the 5 storeys that have been approved to 11 storeys.
The approved 15 residential units would increase to 40 units.
 The issue for this location has always been the retention of the heritage structure. A development application has not been submitted to the city at this time.
A public meeting is to be held on February 21st at 6:30 pm at the Lion’s Club at 471 Pearl..
The changes the developer wants would require an amendment to the Official Plan and a change to the zoning bylaw.
The immediate area has a number of development applications that have either been approved (ADI at the corner of Martha and Lakeshore 24 storeys) or are in the process of being considered by the city’s Planning department. They include plans for an 11 storey development on the east side of Martha south of the James – New Street intersection, the Mattamy development – 18 storeys at the corner of James and Martha
 The Mattamy development – 17 storeys – has had a convoluted approval path. A proposal for 29 storeys – (the highest so far for the city) at the intersection of Pearl and Lakeshore Road.
This number of developments gives the word “intensification” a whole new meaning doesn’t it.
The Mayor is now looking at a number of developments that challenge the current bylaw – crunch time soon for what kind of city Burlington is going to be a decade from now.
By Pepper Parr
February 16th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Earlier in the year, after dismissing the City Manager, Council hired Tim Commisso to serve as an Interim city Manager for what was described as a six month contract, while City Council figured out what it wanted in the way of a new City Manager.
 Tim Commisso – Interim or Acting? Commisso had been employed by the city of Burlington for a number of years and left holding the title of General Manager.
Our sources tell us that he was a “stand up kind of guy”. A straight shooter who was liked, respected and appreciated. Commisso left Burlington to return to Thunder Bay, the city he was raised in, to serve as City Manager and retired from that job.
He seemed like a good fit for Burlington’s short term needs.
What is confusing is the way Commisso is described in a document that will go to the Budget Committee next week. That document has him as the “Acting” City Manager.
What is the difference between an Acting and an Interim? And why the change now? And who made or approved he change?
Just asking!
 By Pepper Parr
February 15th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The city has plans to upgrade the look and feel of civic square and they are asking artists who have an interest in making the city a nice place to live to submit their ideas.
Upgrading the Civic Square has been one of those things the city hasn’t asked the citizens of the city to chime in on. They will get a chance to get their views in between May 13th and 27th.
 The flag poles will be moved further up Brant Street opening up Civic Square. The overall design has been determined and artists are being asked to come up with some ideas on what kind of shading there should be and what it could look like.
The competition closes on March 15th – for those that are artists there is all the detail you will want right here.
There is a fee of $115,000 for the artist(s) chosen to do the job.
In the two diagrams that follow the city sets out what will be put where in terms of the flag poles – the six are going to be upgraded to eight.
There will be additional furniture and some tidying up around the fountain.
The objective is to create a shade structure(s) to complement planned upgrades to the small gathering place in front of City Hall.
The creation and installation of the artwork is a two phase process. First phase is a look at what has come in in the way of ideas; phase two will be narrowing down to a short list of artists who will be asked to provide a preliminary art work concept.
The city describes Civic Square as a small yet vital gathering space located in the heart of downtown Burlington and acts as the front entrance to City Hall. In addition to providing residents and visitors a space to stop and rest, Civic Square is also home to a variety of arts and culture events.
Civic Square will be undergoing a renewal project to improve the quality of Civic Square as an extension of Burlington’s downtown main street. The primary objectives are to improve accessibility and overall character and to better support the community and local downtown businesses.
o Addition of lighting and moveable seating,
o Replacement of existing clay brick pavements and drainage system,
o Overall grade to be raised to eliminate steps and improve accessibility,
o Perimeter concrete planter/seat walls to remain but seat caps will be replaced,
o Addition of new trees, moveable planters and other plantings,
o Relocate existing flagpoles and adding two (2) more for a total of eight (8),
o Existing clock and decorative water fountain to remain in place.
In the instructions to the artists we learn that: “The overhead shade structure(s) will be installed on the south side of Civic Square. Ideally, this shade structure should be comprised of two to three (2-3) separate canopies, each supported by an independent foundation. The shade structure(s) will complement other site amenities including the concrete planter/seat wall, moveable seating, lighting and custom paving to create a space that is welcoming and open to pedestrians. It is anticipated that these amenities will further encourage the casual use of the space.”
Under a separate tendering process, the City will procure the contracted construction for Civic Square and Brant Street renewal in June so that on-site work can begin in late June.
The Civic Square tender project will not include the construction of the shade structure however it will include a lump sum cash allowance for the construction of the shade structure footings. The cost for the construction of the footings is not part of the $115,000 for this commission, as it will be paid for out of the construction budget for the Civic Square Project.
The contractor for the Civic Square project is anticipated to be complete and off-site by end of September. The artist will be expected to install the shade structure in October/November 2019.
Estimated Project Timeline (2019)
 By Staff
February 15th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Gary Scobie attended a Local Planning Act Tribunal (LPAT) case conference meeting recently.
It was the follow up to a meeting at which he presented a lengthy document on why he felt the Reserve Properties appeal of a city council decision that permitted 17 stories the developer wants 24 – same as the one on the other side of the street.
The LPAT Case Management Conference was for the 409 Brant Street Appeal. Reserve Properties wants 23 storeys instead of the 17 storeys approved by Council in 2018. Reserve Properties wants to be able to go as high into the sky as Carriage Gate is going to go with their approved 24 story tower on the other side of James Street.
 Scobie expects the location to be called “Twin Towers” should the Reserve Properties win at the appeal hearing.
Scobie had applied to be a Participant in the LPAT appeal back in January and he submitted his views to all Parties as required and filled in all the proper paperwork. Those views are the subject of an opinion piece Scobie wrote.
Yesterday the LPAT representative Chris Conti agreed with the Parties that they should all wait for the outcome of a pending trial in Toronto that will better define how LPAT functions going forward. The objective of the Case Management Conference was to set a date sometime in the summer for the next LPAT meeting on the Reserve appeal..
Scobie finds he is still a Participant in the appeal hearing, as far as he understands, but was told that his role may have ended with his submission. He apparently has no ability as a Participant to further expand or comment on the submission he made nor will anyone ask him any questions on the document.
Doesn’t sound as if the LPAT process does anything for citizens than the former Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) process did.
Related article:
Scobie’s presentation to the Local Planning Act Tribunal
 By Ray Rivers
February 13th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The Globe and Mail gets the prize for turning what might have been a relatively peaceful run-up to this October’s federal election into an exciting game of gotcha. Everyone is waiting to hear from Canada’s former Attorney General, Jody Wilson-Raybould, who has remained silent to this point but is clearly stirring the pot.
 No one really knows what happened – at some point Jody-Wilson-Raybould will have something to say and it will reverberate. Having hired a heavy hitting legal beagle to represent her, it is only a matter of time until she starts singing publicly about what has been going on. Though that has not stopped just about everyone, least of all the politico’s, from heavily debating and already passing judgement.
If the Globe is right, this is about a decade-old bribe which SNC Lavalin paid Libyan dictator Gaddafi’s family in order to build public works there. Bribery and corruption are illegal for Canadian companies even if they do it off shore. The SNC executives responsible have all left the company, one had served time in a Swiss jail, and the company itself has been banned from obtaining UN contracts for a decade.
Quebec based Lavalin is one of the top-ranked engineering design firms in the world with operations in over 160 countries and employing thousands in Canada. Its operations cover the field from primary to service sector consulting and engineering services, including the Candu Energy nuclear reactor division, which it acquired from Atomic Energy Canada several years ago.
 SNC Lavalin – has been a problem corporation for some time but always a big big hitter in Quebec. Last fall Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPA) were made law in Canada, bringing us in line with US and UK corporate wrong doing legislation. A DPA, which has been under development for a while, is essentially a plea bargain whereby the guilty party acknowledges their wrong doing, pays a hefty fine and promises to be good from now on. And most importantly for everyone, it avoids a costly and uncertain trial.
We have been led to believe from the Globe articles that Kathleen Roussel, Canada’s director of public prosecutions wanted to take SNC to trial regardless of the DPA. And further that AG Wilson-Raybould was standing by her director of prosecutions. But the prime minister’s office or somebody else was pressuring the AG to change her stand and her mind.
 In better days – they were made for each other. The PM claims that neither he nor his office ever directed the AG to go the DPA route and that he had told Wilson-Rayboult these kinds of decisions were hers and hers only. But then she was moved out of the AG position at the last Cabinet shuffle and given a lesser portfolio.
All of this leaves more questions than answers:
1. If he had every confidence in his AG, why did Trudeau shuffle her?
2. If he just wanted to shuffle his Cabinet, why send her to Veterans’ Affairs, which is considered a demotion?
3. Shouldn’t Trudeau have been prepared for disappointment and even hostility from his former AG for demoting her?
4. Wilson-Rayboult would have been instrumental in drafting the DPA, why didn’t she support it rather than a trial for the SNC case?
5. If it wasn’t the PM, who in the PMO was pressuring the former AG?
6. Was SNC-Lavalin also involved in pressuring the AG?
7. Clearly this issue would have been discussed extensively in Cabinet and among the PM and AG’s advisors – if she felt she couldn’t do what was right, why didn’t she resign then as AG, rather than now?
8. As AG, a powerful Cabinet position, why didn’t she just stand her ground – or at least have the conversation with the PM he said he was open to?
9. Who leaked the story to the Globe and if it was the former AG, wasn’t she breaching Cabinet secrecy and also breaking the law?
This story is far from over but everyone needs to keep their gun powder dry (for the firing squad) until there are some answers to these questions. I will be following up on this story in due course.
 Ray Rivers writes regularly on both federal and provincial politics, applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was once a candidate for provincial office in Burlington. He was the founder of the Burlington citizen committee on sustainability at a time when climate warming was a hotly debated subject. Ray has a post graduate degree in economics that he earned at the University of Ottawa. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
Lavalin – DPA – Lavalin Other Crimes –
Lavalin Background – AG Talks – MacLeans Story –
 By Staff
February 13th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
If they had waited a day it could be seen as a Valentine from the province saying they really did love us.
The Region announced this afternoon that the provincial government is funding new infrastructure to relieve traffic in Burlington and Oakville
The provincial commitment is to fund the Wyecroft Road Extension and Bridge Project.
In July 2018, Regional Council approved this critical infrastructure project as the candidate to utilize the remaining funding of $57.6 million from the Move Ontario Quick Wins Fund.
 Wyecroft Road will extend past Bronte and cross the Bronte Creek to lead on into Burlington. Wyecroft Road currently ends at Bronte Creek and local traffic is diverted north to the QEW or south through residential neighbourhoods. The road extension and bridge crossing will now connect Burlington and Oakville over Bronte Creek and provide much needed traffic relief for the area.
“The Wyecroft Road Extension and Bridge Project will provide critical east-west connectivity over Bronte Creek between the City of Burlington and the Town of Oakville,” said Halton Regional Chair Gary Carr. “I would like to thank the Provincial Government for this investment in infrastructure that will allow residents, businesses, cyclists, transit users, pedestrians, first responders and motorists to experience an immediate benefit from a multi-modal connective corridor.”
The funding of the Wyecroft Road bridge does mean that the grade separation for Mainway east of Walkers Line will be on hold for a little longer – unless of course the province wants to lay just a little more love on us.
Burlington Mayor Marianne Meed Ward “ welcomes the announcement of the much needed project that will bridge Oakville and Burlington, providing greater access and transportation options for residents, and help reduce congestion on the QEW by providing additional east-west connections.”
By Gary Scobie
February 13th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
I am a citizen of Burlington who has taken an interest in the re-development of Burlington’s downtown, delegating at numerous Planning and Development Meetings and City Council Meetings in opposition to the over-intensification of Burlington, particularly our downtown.
I wish to participate in this LPAT appeal, speaking in opposition to the appeal by Reserve Properties Ltd. I have no direct pecuniary interest in this development. My written submission follows.
 Gary Scobie I have delegated at City Hall on this development proposal, on the 421 Brant Street proposal (now approved), on the 374 Martha Street proposal (now approved) and on Burlington’s new Official Plan (unapproved), so I have a history of engaging in development matters in Burlington. I am fully aware of the Places to Grow, Greenbelt and Metrolinx legislation in Ontario and the desire to intensify Southern Ontario municipalities, reduce urban sprawl and protect our natural and agricultural greenbelt.
I understand the minimum density targets assigned to areas designated as Urban Growth Centres and Mobility Hubs. I also understand that there are no building upper height regulations in Provincial legislation. Building height upper limit is left to municipalities and their zoning regulations. Thus municipalities have the obligation and the right to define how they will meet Provincial people/jobs density targets and where high buildings should best be situated to add to density while preserving the urban character and living environment for citizens.
I do take issue with the Provincial designation of Downtown Burlington as an Urban Growth Centre and the Metrolinx designation of the Downtown Burlington Transit Terminal as an Anchor Mobility Hub. They each bring density targets to our downtown that I feel are excessive. I believe that our new City Council will be debating the merits and validity of these designations and consulting with the Province on the ability to move the Urban Growth Centre elsewhere in Burlington and un-designate the Anchor Mobility Hub. I will reference these two issues further in my submission.
I will also reference our new unapproved Official Plan and how it has been used by developers and our former City Council to gain inappropriate building heights downtown while violating our current approved Official Plan. Our new City Council will also be debating amendments to limit height in this unapproved plan before sending it back to Halton Region for approval.
In actual fact, this appeal is not inconsistent with a Provincial Policy Statement and does not fail to conform to a provincial plan. But that is in itself a real problem. The policy statements and plans of the Province place no upper limits on building heights, so when the sky is the limit then there can be no violation or lack of conformity by a developer’s application that involves high rises. With no limits on height, no building adding density in a designated urban area would ever fail a provincial mandate or target. The density targets, whether within a Mobility Hub or Urban Growth Centre or not, can usually be met with mid-rise buildings. But developers like high rise buildings because their motivation is profit rather than public good. Public good (or bad) is just a by-product of the constructed building.
 What a develop wants to build on the south side of James Street on Brant will dwarf city hall even further. Gary Scobie spoke at the LPAT meeting which is hearing an appeal of the 17 storey’s the city approved for the site – the developer wants 24 storeys. Developers can dress their proposals up to look and sound pretty nice and say that the Province is demanding that they build high rises, but that is not true. The Province is simply asking municipalities to build to an area density target, not a site specific one. And yes, the target can be exceeded, but it is not mandated. My understanding is that most cities are well short of their assigned area targets, unlike Downtown Burlington which will reach its Urban Growth Centre Target well ahead of time. And there are no announced penalties for cities that do not meet target. So the Province’s targets are just that; targets that have no teeth behind them and leave the real work to the municipalities to figure it all out. I ask the Tribunal to let the City of Burlington do just that.
Let me use an analogy to make a point. Pretend we’re in a very small room that has a grid pattern of downtown streets on the floor, with electrical connections running along each street. The Province says heat the lower half of the room to a certain average temperature. Developers suggest that 150 watt incandescent light bulbs at most corners should do it. They each produce a lot of heat as a by-product of lighting them. But this creates high heat just at each location, while other parts of the room stay cool. It is inefficient, but it does eventually bring the average temperature up, but with hot areas at street corners and cool areas elsewhere. The average temperature is likely felt by no one.
 How many light bulbs will it take for the decision makers to see the light? The Planning Department and Council have a better idea. Use 40 and 60 watt incandescent bulbs not just at corners but also along some more of the downtown streets, so heat buildup at each bulb location is less, but more bulbs spread this lower localized heat around much more efficiently to bring the same average temperature as the developers’ solution, but spread more evenly across the downtown so more people actually feel the average temperature.
In real life, the 150 watt bulbs are high rises. The 40 watt bulbs are low rises to 4 storeys. The 60 watt bulbs are mid rises to 11 storeys. High rises concentrate people, parking and traffic congestion, shadowing and wind effect in high degrees at major corners. Low and mid rise buildings concentrate fewer people per building across a greater spread of the downtown, so congestion for traffic and parking is lessened because it is spread out in the wider area. There would be less shadowing and wind effect from lower buildings. The ability to fight a fire in such lower buildings would be much easier than to fight a high rise fire, lessening the danger to tenants. Both solutions can reach an area target, but the low to mid rise solution does it in a kinder and gentler way, without packing in hundreds of people in small ground area sites soaring to great heights just to give us a new skyline.
Of course neither solution would have to be considered if our downtown was freed from Urban Growth Centre and Anchor Mobility Hub designations and their growth targets.
 Quite where the city hall fits into the longer term development picture is not at all clear. There is a report in a file outlining what might be possible. Getting back to this proposal, to build to match the height of the tower across the road (421 Brant Street) is simply using as a precedent a poor decision by our former City Council to over-reach in height its own current and proposed Official Plans, against the public outcry and the public good. The idea of the twin towers as a gateway to our iconic eight storey City Hall and its adjacent Civic Square is one great marketing scheme, but fails as suitable to this location. I believe it fails as suitable in any location in Burlington. A gateway is usually a structure far lower in height than 23 storeys. And no gateway is required to our City Hall. The approach along New Street, then James Street is a grand enough gateway.
I ask the Tribunal to keep in mind that the new City Council may succeed in removing the Urban Growth Centre and the Anchor Mobility Hub from the downtown, making a mockery of any claim that we must build this tall building here or anywhere downtown to conform to provincial policy and plan. The old Council assured citizens that no new single building creates a precedent. Yet developers seek to use precedent as a reason to build ever-higher (and in this case near twin) buildings and the OMB has in the past let precedent seep into decision-making. I request that the LPAT not be influenced by precedent-based arguments from developers. Using bad precedents will only produce a worse future.
The Urban Growth Centre can be moved by a municipality – Oakville did so in 2005. An Anchor Mobility Hub is required to have a dedicated rapid light rail connection with a Gateway Mobility Hub. There are no plans for an above-ground or subway rapid transit linkage connecting the Transit Terminal to the Burlington GO Station. Thus, it does not qualify as a valid Anchor Mobility Hub.
 Boundaries set out for the Downtown mobility hub. Scobie argues that the criteria for a hub don’t exist.
Now to the factual reason that the Tribunal should deny this appeal and in fact, if within its power, reduce the height to a mid-rise limit. Our new Mayor, as Councillor for the Downtown in the previous Council, proved that we were on target in moving toward the 2031 density numbers with the current Official Plan and advocated for an easing of height limits that were proposed in the new Official Plan. With a new Council in place, with a majority of members who were elected advocating for such an easing, I am confident that they will support the Mayor in her advocacy for reasonable height downtown.The appeal height request and the previous Council decision to award 17 storeys height both fly in the face of the current approved Official Plan which designates a 4 storey height, moving to 8 storeys with negotiated community benefits. As do the density numbers which are proposed by the developer at 1135 units per hectare.
If we use a conservative average of 2 people/jobs per unit, this would translate to 2270 people/jobs per hectare, where the current Official Plan would allow up to an 8 storey building, roughly one-third as high and therefore holding approximately 700 people/jobs per hectare, still fairly dense and helping move toward the area target of 200 people/jobs per hectare of an Urban Growth Centre.
 Opposite city hall on north side of James Opposite city hall on the south side of James. Developer wants same height as the other side of the street 24 storeys – city approved 17 storeys. An eight storey building on this site would aid the target and impose a much less imposing structure on this neighbourhood. It would be a model to replicate in other downtown core locations that the Planning Department and City Council deem suitable to intensification toward target. It would also agree with the current Official Plan. These are reasons enough to turn down the appeal by the developer and allow the City to decide on height in the downtown core that is more in line with citizen wishes. If possible, I would recommend that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal not only do this, but rule to uphold current City Zoning at this site if it is within its power.
This appeal is clearly in violation of the Official Plan of our municipality. The past poor decisions of City Council and the OMB on excessive intensification in our downtown cannot be undone, but they can serve as learning experiences to help guide our planning in the future to increase density, in a way that helps our downtown maintain its character and attraction without the over-congestion that comes with high rise after high rise appearing at each major corner and section assembled by developers.
 The former retail location is empty – developer has been given approval for 17 storeys – has appealed to allow 24 storeys.  Once a popular restaurant location – it will be redeveloped and become a 24 story condominium. The history of treating each high rise application as a one-off decision in isolation without looking at future ramifications of the cumulative effect of successive high rise applications in a small area should end here. I’m asking the LPAT to consider this issue and support our municipality in its quest to grow its density in its own way, by rendering a decision that will promote this.
By Staff
February 12th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Those who want a simpler, smaller more cohesive community might shudder just a bit when they learn of the three towers that New Horizons want to build in Stoney Creek.
Proposed for a site that will have three towers – 59, 54 and 48 storeys, respectively, on Frances Avenue near Green Road overlooking Lake Ontario
 The massive development could add 1,836 units to the neighbourhood between the water and the QEW.
Burlington residents might begin to feel they are lucky that developments in this city will be at the mid twenty storey level.
New Horizons is the developer building the Bridgewater condominium site on Lakeshore Road at Elizabeth. Completion date is not known – the topping off appears to be done.
The tallest structure in the three unit development is 22 storeys which is made up of two condominiums and a four star Marriott Hotel.
By Pepper Parr
February 11th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Yesterday the Gazette published an opinion piece on an opportunity for the current city council to take steps to ensure that Burlington got the kind of city manager it needs.
Mayor Meed Ward made a point of telling the public that council was going to take the time to get the job done right.
A Gazette reader commented as follows:
You have provided a good and thoughtful perspective on the current situation. There is a rare opportunity today for City Hall to be opened up, programs made understandable to citizens, performance made transparent and staff made both accountable and visible to the clients they serve.
 Burlington has hundreds of residents who want to play a part in creating a city that fits the vision they have. This is one of the crowds that took part in a public meeting. There are a number of readily available exemplars in the form of other jurisdictions that have adopted ‘open government’ reforms to make the bureaucracy responsive/understandable to the public, to greatly improve client service, to reduce unnecessary processes and boost overall function.
I would hope that this Mayor and this Council would look for best practices in other jurisdictions, as they exist quite close at hand – Toronto, Hamilton and Oakville to name just three.
Similarly, I would expect that Burlington might want to beg, borrow (or steal) the directly applicable expertise that is at hand, both in other municipalities and right in our own backyard.
However, to date (and it is early days), the signs have not been overly positive. Simple reforms such as staff contact listings, clear organizational charts and simple program guides remain on the ‘to do’ shelf.
 This was a meeting for people interested in the process of getting elected. The desire for a better form of local government was there. The 2018 election did bring in a much different city council that can now tap into all the talent available. More substantive improvements such as performance dashboards, responsive reporting and feedback vehicles and effective self-service portals are not even referenced. Indeed, the COB website remains one of the worst and most difficult to navigate of any municipality in the GTA (IMO). And recent staff additions appear to focus on communications and social media without any marked improvement in these areas either.
Time will tell whether this is the watershed Council many had hoped for. Early indications are not promising.
Let us not despair this early in the game.
Gazette readers have commented intelligently in the past; there is an opportunity now for those readers to do some research on just where they feel “open government” is practiced and set out some ideas that members of council can benefit from.
We look forward to publishing what we receive.
By Pepper Parr
February 12th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The business of making changes to the Official Plan that was adopted by city council on April 26, 2018 but not accepted by the Regional government has begun.
Changes to the Official Plan was a contentious election issue and resulted in a new Mayor and a decidedly different council. Five of the members are new.
Getting all the changes made is not going to be a simple one step process.
On Feb. 7, 2019, Burlington City Council voted to re-examine the policies in Burlington’s Official Plan, adopted in April 2018. That plan was sent to Halton Region for approval. The Region sent the plan back with some questions without approving it.
 Mayor Meed Ward has taken the position that “Once the Region identified areas of non-conformity, that stopped the clock on approving the new Official Plan and opened the plan up for any other matters of discussion. This allows our new City Council the time to define what areas we want to study, undertake that work, consult with the community, and send back a comprehensive plan. We expect that plan to truly reflect the needs, best interests and vision of the community and it’s elected Council.
The motion, approved by Council, directs Burlington’s Director of City Building to immediately commence a process to re-examine the policies of the Official Plan adopted April 26, 2018.
Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017
On January 15, 2019, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing released proposed amendments to the Growth Plan, 2017 which can be found here. The Province identified that the purpose of the proposed changes is to streamline growth management planning in the Greater Golden Horseshoe to achieve the following outcomes:
• More Streamlined Process: Provide greater flexibility so that municipalities will be able to move forward faster on the implementation of the Plan and meet the deadline to update Upper-tier and Single-tier official plans to conform with the Plan by July 1, 2022.
 One of the development proposals that can resolve the housing availability. Nothing affordable about it. • More Land for Housing: Respect the ability of local governments to make decisions about when and where to add new land for housing, to ensure that there is enough housing supply to meet demand.
• More Housing and Jobs near Transit: A more flexible framework for focusing investments around transit infrastructure will enable municipalities to plan to increase the supply of housing and jobs near transit faster and more effectively.
• Greater Local Autonomy and Flexibility for Municipalities: Ensuring that municipalities will have the ability to implement the Plan in a manner that better reflects their local context while protecting the Greenbelt.
A staff report regarding the proposed submission to the Province will be delivered to Planning and Development Committee on February 27th at 1 pm.
It is clear that there are going to be many stages in the re-writing of the plan that was approved in April of last year. What we are seeing now is just the first step. It will be interesting to see how Staff responds to the Direction.
The matter of streamlining the process has a number of Burlington residents who have been trying to take part in Tribunal hearings concerned.
One Gazette reader said in her opinion “the streamlining comes about because there is little or no resident participation.”
 Residents are finding that they have no problem preparing comments – they are accepted and put in the file. But when they ask to be able to be a “participant” they are for the most part being denied.
Gary Scobie delegating at city hall. Gary Scobie asked to be a participant on the Reserve development for the former Elizabeth Interiors property. The developer didn’t have a problem with Scobie and the city lawyer didn’t have a problem – so there he was – a participant. Now what – Scobie doesn’t know – he might have played his role – submitting a document.
A resident of the Dynes Community was told they would not be recognized as participants. To date that group has spent $17,000 to date on legal counsel.
Being a participant you have no liability. If you have status as a Party you could be sued if the developer thinks you have simply tried to delay an application from being approved.
With the OMB – a resident could come to the hearing – and as a participant could basically delegate. The lawyers from both sides then had the opportunity to “cross examine the witness”.
The residents we have talked to get the feeling that the process is going to be “streamlined” because it will consist of lawyers talking to lawyers and arguing fine points of provincial policy. The “local” element and response seems to be missing.
Not a healthy process.
Will the city planners push for better public participation?
 By Staff
February 12th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Enough said the decision makers at city hall.
As of 4 p.m. today, the City of Burlington is closing all city facilities and cancelling all city-run programs and rentals for Tuesday, Feb. 12. The City will work with sport user groups and renters to reschedule times.
Residents are strongly encouraged to avoid travelling as the roads are unpredictable as the city’s snow-fighters plow, sand and salt the primary roads.
 Hospitality services taking a beating today. All vehicles parked on the street must be removed and parking exemptions are void. Failure to remove vehicles from residential roads could result in being ticketed or possibly towed to allow snow plows and other heavy machinery to safely navigate the narrow streets.
If residents notice a vehicle on their street, they are encouraged to kindly ask the owner to remove the vehicle or call Parking Control during business hours at 905-335-7816 (Monday to Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.) or after-hours, Halton Regional Police Service at 905-878-5511. (Ask for “dispatch” and police will send a parking officer).
Residents are also asked for their patience as clearing all 1,900 km of roads can take up to 24 hours and 850 km of sidewalks can take up to 72 hours to clear.
 By Staff
February 12th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The Planning and Development Committee scheduled for this evening – Tuesday February 12th has been CANCELLED. It will be rescheduled.
A Statutory meeting on the Lakeside Village Plaza was on that agenda. There are many people wanting to delegate at that event.
 The proposed plan was just a little too much for most people in the neighborhood. Has the developer heard what the residents thought?
By Staff
February 12th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The city has a message for those who are able to or have to stay at home because of the weather: Don’t park your car on the street – give the snow plow operators a chance to do their job.
An accumulation of 15-20cm is expected The city will be concentrating on Primary and Secondary roads during the snowfall.
Please do not follow snow plows too closely or pass them when they are clearing the roads. Vehicles parked on-street during a snowfall and prior to clean up operations may be subject to ticketing or towing.
 By Pepper Parr
February 11th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
 With power in her hands – Mayor Meed Ward has an opportunity to really lead. When newly elected Burlington Mayor Marianne Meed Ward had the Chain of Office placed around her neck on December 3rd, she told the audience that she had some news she would release the following day.
The next day city hall announced the dismissal of city manager James Ridge.
Interim city manager Tim Commisso. While there was a Deputy City Manager, this new city council wanted an experienced city manager in place and entered into a short term agreement with Tim Commisso to serve as an Interim City Manager for a period of six months and announced that council would begin the process of finding the next full time city manager
Burlington has gone through four city managers in an eight year time frame.
Former Mayor Rick Goldring dismissed Roman Martiuk. The city then hired Jeff Fielding who left the city of London to come to Burlington.
 Former City manager Jeff Fielding did his best to significantly reorganize the senior levels at city hall. When a better offer came along he left. City staff needed time to get used to the energy and drive that Fielding brought to the city. After less than two years a head-hunter discovered Fielding and introduced him to Naheed Nenshi, Mayor of Calgary – those two were a match made in heaven.
Fielding resigned and the city was once again looking for a city manager. They brought in Pat Moyle, who was a retired CAO for the Region of Halton to Burlington.
Moyle saw the city through the August 2014 flood and kept the city on track while the search for the next city manager took place.
Council settled on James Ridge who came to Burlington from British Columbia. Ridge was a good fit for the Goldring council; – he wasn’t a fit for then ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward.
 City manager |James Ridge defined his job as protecting his staff rather than holding them accountable. In one memorable memo he told staff that he “had their backs”. Ridge is reported to have told a person he knew well at city hall that if Meed Ward won he would not be the city manager for long. That proved to be true.
There has been no word yet on if there have been any meetings on what the process of looking for a new city manager will be.
In a detailed book on the Premiership of John Robarts, who was Premier from 1961 to 1971, Steve Paikin reports that in 1968 Robarts “created one of the most important advisory bodies in his entire premiership.”
 John Robarts – one of the best Premiers the province ever had. Robarts had been convinced that the province had grown to the point where it needed more qualified people in its senior ranks and created a Commission on Government Productivity that helped set the framework for an administration that has served the province exceptionally well.
The Commission wrote ten reports and lasted well beyond Robarts’ years as Premier. It submitted ten reports.
The Gazette is not suggesting that Meed Ward and her council create a commission that takes a decade and writes ten reports but she might want to give serious consideration to looking for outside advice on what the structure of a municipal government should – could look like in these changing times.
The last time any advice was given to Burlington’s city hall it didn’t get much in the way of a professional reception.
 The Shape Burlington report set out what was wrong with city hall and what was needed in the way of change. Written by John Boich and former Mayor Walter Mulkewich who were served by a board of advisors, Senior city hall staff at the time didn’t want the report published – that wish wasn’t granted – they then wanted some changes in the wording.
 John Boich – co-chair of the Shape Burlington Committee died in 2011 Asking the late John Boich to revise strongly held views was not a wise response. In terms of culture and the way city hall has chosen to serve the public that pays them – here hasn’t been much of a change. City managers have taken the view that their role is to protect their staff rather than consistently hold them accountable for the quality of the work they do.
It should be possible to find a consulting firm (not the one that foisted that 25 year Strategic Plan on the city), to do a comprehensive report in three months and then meet with council to expand on their views and recommendations.
 There is an opportunity to change the way city hall is currently organized – too many silos as well as significantly change the culture. Shape Burlington was the start. If the city is ever going to get to be run properly they might as well take the time to do it right. There are structural issues that need attention and there are cultural issues that need to be worked on.
Let us not make this a missed opportunity.
Salt with Pepper are the views,musings and opinions of the Gazette Publisher.
 By Staff
February 11th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The Tyandaga Environmental Coalition (TEC) continues to focus on the issue of Meridian Brick’s planned development (clear cutting and quarrying the North Aldershot East Quarry in ward 1.
During the election they focused on getting their story in front of every candidate – a mammoth task with 11 people running for the ward 1 seat.
 The quarry operation was part of a corporate amalgamation and was re-named – Meridian Brick. “TEC was delighted” with the outcome at the Mayorality level – they needed some time to get a sensed as to where the new Council member for the ward stood on the quarry issue.
They are now reviewing/resetting their strategy as a result of the new leadership and senior staffing changes at city along with the change in policies and legislation.
In November, 2018 TEC members had an introductory meeting with MPP Jane Mckenna who is open to meeting again.
 Tyandaga community organizes to prevent the clearing of an estimated 9000 trees behind their homes. On February 6th, members of TEC met with Councillor Galbraith. It was an introductory meeting at which TEC requested that he and the City take the lead and determine a solution that would benefit all involved and stop the clear cutting.
 Ward 1 city Councillor Kevlin Galbraith “We were pleased to hear that this community matter is a priority for Galbraith. We expect he will speak about this at his upcoming ward meeting which will take place on Wednesday February 13 from 7-9pm at NUVO Network, 1295 North Service Road, Burlington.”
Note that due to ongoing renovations, the front door at NUVO Network is not in use – parking and entrance are at the back of the building.
You can find his contact information on the Galbraith website: https://www.burlington.ca/en/your-city/councillor-kelvin-galbraith.asp
By Ray Rivers
February 11th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
We’ve seen the numbers. Canadians spend almost $30 billion a year on some 600 million prescriptions. And we know we could save as much as $8 billion by transitioning to a universal nation-wide single-payer system. It’s a no-brainer, right?
 Tommy Douglas – advocating for universal health care. What would a universal program look like? It could be modeled on Canada’s universal health care system. In fact that would make it the perfect complement – administered by the provinces and funded jointly by both levels of government. The provinces already have a seniors’ drug program in place, and Ontario even had an OHIP+, covering those youth without a private health plan.
But to go that route, the provinces would have to agree among themselves on the universality and portability aspects. And they’d have to agree with the federal government on their joint responsibilities and cost sharing. That kind of deal might have been do-able back when the feds and most of the provinces shared a common political stripe, but with national partisan bickering increasing in the lead-up to the 2019 federal election, it won’t likely happen this year.
 Doug Ford at the Joseph Brant Hospital For starters, Ontario, which is preoccupied with cutting or ending former Liberal programs has little interest in adding anything resembling a new or expanded social program, especially one which might lead to increased taxes. And cost-sharing discussions with a federal government currently being sued over carbon taxes is definitely a non-starter.
On the other hand there are good reasons for the federal government to implement a cross Canada program all on its own, given federal jurisdiction in the management of pharmaceuticals in this country.
One might expect the provinces to welcome a comprehensive program, funded at the federal level, saving them the costs of current provincial drug programs. But provinces are always wary about federal intrusion in what they see as their areas of responsibility, particularly in Quebec, so it’s not that easy.
How can we afford it? Well folks we are already paying the costs…and more. The existing patchwork of federal and provincial government subsidized programs is being funded through your tax dollars. On top of that, there is the cash we dole out at the pharmacy, the subscriptions to private drug plans, and the lower earnings accompanying a work place drug benefit. And that doesn’t count the costs to both the health system and work places for people who can’t afford to fill their prescriptions and end up just getting sicker.
It’s what we learned after moving to single-payer universal health care. We can’t afford not to have Pharma care. The four to eight billion dollar savings estimates may be speculative but it’s clear the savings won’t be zero. Efficiencies will be gained as competing pharmaceutical programs are reduced. Lower prices should be expected by negotiating for larger orders and buying in bulk. And then, of course, there is all that drug and drug insurance company profit.
 Profits for the pharmaceutical industry are among the highest in the world. Besides partisan politics at the provincial level, the other obstacle to implementation comes from lobbying by the Canadian patent drug industry and its international parents. They have become wary of efforts like Pharma care to compromise their profits in the nation with the highest drug prices on earth, after the USA. So they have offered to voluntarily hold the line on drug price increases over the next decade.
Their offer, which they estimate at $26 billion has been spurned by the federal government and for good reason. One has only to look at countries like New Zealand for inspiration. They manage to keep drug prices as low as one tenth of those here.
Pharma care was an integral part of Tommy Douglas’ vision for the nation’s first medicare program which he enacted In Saskatchewan. It was also a component of the original plan for universal national health coverage which the Pearson government introduced in 1964. The federal Liberals, in 1997, campaigned on a pledge to develop a plan for the implementation of universal Pharma care but failed to deliver.
 Jack Layton won almost everything in Quebec in the 2011 election. That let Stephen Harper form a government with the NDP serving at the Opposition. Only in 2004 had Paul Martin finally secured landmark inter-jurisdictional agreements for a number of social programs, including universal Pharma care. But dithering and being caught up managing fallout from the Liberal Sponsorship scandal took its toll. In 2006 Martin’s minority government fell thanks to Jack Layton’s NDP, and with it so did our hopes for universal Pharma care.
Stephen Harper wasted no time giving any more time to universal Pharma care. Tommy Douglas must have shuddered in his grave knowing that his own party had helped deprive Canadians of Pharma care for the next decade and a half. It was only last year that the Liberals announced setting up an advisory committee to plan for a national drug plan.
 Scheer hasn’t had much to say on a universal health care plan. And Trudeau’s own finance minister mused that it might require means testing for income, thus ending dreams of universality. He clearly needs a primer on what the term Pharma care really means. And so does opposition leader Scheer, who, like Harper before him, has been mute on the idea, except for partisan attacks on the person leading the advisory committee.
And if Scheer wins the next election… there may well be somebody else writing this column in fifteen years and she’ll be asking … It’s a no-brainer, right?
Ray Rivers writes weekly on both federal and provincial politics, applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was a candidate for provincial office in Burlington where he ran against Cam Jackson in 1995, the year Mike Harris and the Common Sense Revolution swept the province. He developed the current policy process for the Ontario Liberal Party.
Background links:
Global Pharmacare – Pharmacare – National Program –
Drug Prices Deal – Advisory Committee – Scheer –
 By Staff
February 10th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
  Poverty is not a popular coffee shop conversation; we have it but we don’t talk about it. This social behavior on the part of Burlingtonians is a combination of “see no evil” and the ostrich with its head in the sand.
 The reality is that – there rare poor people in Burlington and the New Democrats talk about it. The Progressive |Conservatives talk about ensuring that everyone can get a job but keep the minimum wage so low that some people need two job to get by.
MPP Sandy Shaw (Hamilton West – Ancaster – Dundas) is going to be in Burlington on Tuesday, February 12th to give a talk on the Ontario NDP’s efforts to fight poverty.
Ted Hildebrandt (Director of Social Planning at Community Development Halton) will also be speaking about the face of poverty in our region, and particularly the hidden face of poverty in Burlington.
The evening will start off with a simple pasta dinner – no charge to attend and it is open to anyone interested in making Ontario a better place to live, regardless of political affiliation.
The event is from 6pm to 8pm February 12th at the auditorium in Central Arena.
|
|
