 By Pepper Parr
February 22nd, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The Gazette keeps hearing about problems at the Seniors’ Centre on New Street. For the most part they are small niggling little issues but when collected together they suggest there is a deeper issue.
 Seniors’ Centre staff showing their concern for the comfort and safety of people who use the facility. Do the staff really care about the people they are supposed to be serving?
These are seniors; the people who have paid their dues and have the right to quality time and more than just a measure of dignity.
The week was registration week – the Gazette published a news report on some of the problems that were being experienced with the registration process and the impact a change in the way programs are paid for was having on some people.
Earlier today we were sent a photograph of a sign that had been set up outside the entrance door advising: For your comfort and safety please do not line up outdoors.
The doors should be opened as early as possible so that the seniors can be both safe and comfortable.
There is a care taker in the building – he could unlock the doors and people could wait in the auditorium.
People get to the Centre as early as possible so they can obtain a number and be in the registration line based on the number they hold. These people want to take courses – many of them that are exercise classes. They want to remain healthy and active – but the staff seem to want them to stand out in the cold.
Burlington is a city that talks about the way it cares for its citizens but refuses to open the doors to a public building so that older people can get inside and stay out of the chilly if not downright cold weather.
What is wrong with these people?
Related news story:
Empathy appears to be in short supply as Seniors’ Centre
 By Staff
February 22nd, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
If music played on a piano is something you enjoy – and if that music is classical at its very best – mark March 10th on your calendar and log into the Performing Arts Centre web site to book tickets.
 Gryphon Trio: Piano, with Strings Attached Throughout the 2018/19 season, BPAC is celebrating The Piano, presenting a four-concert series showcasing this magnificent instrument in distinct piano presentations, with some of Canada’s keyboard masters. GRYPHON TRIO: Piano, with Strings Attached is the latest installment in the concert series.
One of the most accomplished piano groups in the country, described as Canada’s foremost Piano Trio will be on stage at BPAC for a 1:00 p.m. and a 7:00 pm performance that will include:
Haydn’s Piano Trio in G Minor, Beethoven’s Piano Trio in E-flat Major, and after intermission, they will be joined by a guest violist to perform Brahms’ Piano Quartet No. 1 in G Minor, one of the quintessential Romantic piano chamber works.
Throughout the 2018/19 season, BPAC is celebrating The Piano, presenting a four-concert series showcasing this magnificent instrument in distinct piano presentations, with some of Canada’s keyboard masters. GRYPHON TRIO: Piano, with Strings Attached is the latest installment in this poignant concert series.
 Gryphon Trio in concert: Roman Borys, Annalee Patipatanakoon, and Jamie Parker. The multiple JUNO-winning Gryphon Trio returns to Burlington to perform chamber piano masterpieces. This year, the Gryphon Trio celebrated its milestone 25th anniversary. Throughout their history, they have firmly established themselves as one of the world’s preeminent piano trios, garnering acclaim and impressing international audiences with its highly refined, dynamic and memorable performances.
The trio is made up of Roman Borys, Annalee Patipatanakoon, and Jamie Parker. Roman is the Artistic and Executive Director of the Ottawa Chamber Music Society, Annalee and Jamie serve as OCMS’s Artistic Advisors in addition to their responsibilities at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Music, where Jamie is the Rupert E Edwards Chair in Piano Performance and Annalee is the Associate Professor of Violin and Head of Strings.
GRYPHON TRIO: Piano, with Strings Attached
Sunday, March 10, 2019, 1:00pm & 7:00pm
Main Theatre
440 Locust Street, Burlington, ON, L7S 1T7
Tickets:
$49 Regular
$44 Member
Group pricing available
*All prices include tax and fees.
To Purchase Tickets:
Online: www.burlingtonpac.ca
Over the Phone: 905.681.6000
In Person: Monday – Saturday, 12:00pm -4:00pm, or 1 hour before the show
 By Staff
February 22, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
This will come as a bit of a jolt to anyone who wants to be involved in appeals to decisions made by city council on development applications.
A Gazette reader sent us a notice she got from the Local Planning Appeal Support Centre advising her that: “The Government of Ontario has made a decision to close the Local Planning Appeal Support Centre (LPASC). LPASC has until June 30, 2019 to wind down the business.
 So much for process – how do people navigate through the paper work and the procedures? Effective immediately, LPASC will no longer be accepting new requests for professional services from the public. During this wind down period, LPASC is committed to continuing to serve, to the best of its ability, those clients who have retained its services. LPASC staff will be in contact with those clients with further details shortly.
If you have any questions, please send an email to info@lpasc.ca <mailto:info@lpasc.ca> or call 1-800-993-8410.
The questions should also be directed to Burlington’s Member of the provincial Legislature. You might ask just how this decision came about.
By Staff
February 21st, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Registration for both 2019 Spring and Summer recreation programs opens February 23, 2019 for Adults 19+ and 55+. People can register for both programs at 9 a.m., doors will open at 7:30 a.m. for early arrivals.
Registration is available online at burlington.ca/play, in-person at Burlington Seniors Centre, Tansley Woods and Brant Hills Community Centres, or City Hall. Non-residents will be able to register on March 1, 2019.
 The Spring/Summer Live and Play guide, featuring listings for city recreation, sport and culture programs is available online on the City of Burlington website. Printed copies of the guide are available at City Recreation Facilities, City Hall and the Burlington Public Libraries.
The spring session programs begin April 1 and the summer programs will begin on July 8.
Following registration day, in-person registration is available at any customer service location. A listing of locations and hours is available at burlington.ca/servicehours.
For those choosing to register for both spring and summer programs, the option for a deferred payment for summer registration is available. Customers can access this payment option by registering in-person.
 Senior citizen former Mayor Rick Goldring signs up as a member at the Senior’s Centre. Today was program registration day. The City of Burlington would also like to remind residents financial help is available through the Recreational Fee Assistance program for those that qualify.
Recreation Fee Assistance
Recreation Fee Assistance is funding made available to individuals or families who need help to pay for City of Burlington recreational programs.
Fee Assistance can be used for:
• Registered Programs
• Drop-In Programs
• Passes and Memberships
One Gazette reader explained that at a class at the Seniors’ Centre “we were told that the City had decided that moving forward there will be only 2 registration periods. This will start with the February 23rd Registration.
How this will work is as follows: On February 23rd seniors will be registering for programs. Seniors will be able to register for the spring session and/ or the summer session. Some of the classes have very limited space availability and if they don’t register for both in February chances are they won’t get into the class in the summer.
For some residents having to pay for both the spring and summer session could be problematic. We were also told that if the Senior’s membership to the Centre expired before the end of the last class the computer would basically kick them out and they will not be registered in the course. So it would mean that the senior has to pay for both sets of sessions plus the membership fee. Also the City is holding their money for months before completing the session.
We were also told that for those seniors who come into the centre to register, if they could not pay for everything at once arrangements could be made.
What about those seniors that register at home online – they do not have this option of spacing out their payment? More seniors register online, why should this option not be made available to them?
For those seniors who are away ( snowbirds) how will they know that the summer registration starts on February 23rd.
The reader made the point that “once again decisions seem to be made that are not discussed in advance with those who are most affected by these changes.”
 “Parks and Rec tried to make seniors bring their own equipment for Pilates (like large Pilate balls and bands) starting in the Spring and only when this came to light and reported on did Parks & Rec back down.
There appear to be a number of administrative level issues within Parks and Recreation when it comes to how the Seniors’ programs are managed. The issue seems to be at the leadership level – staff do not appear to be very empathetic to the issues seniors face.
 By Staff
February 21st, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
It looks as if the Interim is still the Interim and not the Acting.
 During the Capital Budget Standing Committee meeting today Tim Commisso was addressed as the Interim City Manager. A couple of chuckles were heard from the Staff Section of the council seating.
No one has said anything about how the title “Acting” got attached to Commisso’s name – clerical error perhaps?
The budget meeting went exceptionally well. The performance put in by Ward 4 Councillor Shawna Stolte on handling two very complex financial issues – Information and Technology and the Fire department, were lengthy but very well done.
 The financial requirement for Information Technology was in the millions and brought to light some serious issues that were not known or discussed at anything length at previous budget meetings.
This council is made up of younger people who are not afraid to ask questions and id they aren’t comfortable they ask a follow up question.
 Budget Committee Chair Lisa Kearns Budget Committee Chair Lisa Kearns was able to match the staff member explaining the technology word for word – she has been down that road before. They also managed to take a decent amount of money out of the Capital budget – they are determined to get any tax increase below 3% – given the rate at which they moved today – you can think in terms of something well below that 2.99% Mayor Meed Ward put on the table.
There is a different tone from this council.
“First I want to say these allegations are false. Categorically untrue. Every one of them.” (Patrick Brown, CTV News- January 24, 2019)
 By Ray Rivers
February 20th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Part 4 of a four part article
 Patrick Brown is made leader of the Progressive Party. Sir Isaac Newton taught us that what goes up must come down. But that doesn’t always mean the faster you climb up the political ladder the faster you’ll tumble down. Though it did for Patrick Brown, if being ‘down’ includes ending up as mayor of the sizeable city of Brampton, instead of premier.
Over a year has passed now since Brown was forced out as Ontario PC leader. And if, as he contends, this was a political assassination by his own party, the question is why nobody but me is talking about it. The entire issue has virtually disappeared from the mainstream news. Perhaps it’s because the PCs are able to do a better job of changing the message than their Liberal colleagues. So maybe we’ve got this pro-liberal media bias thing wrong.
Just look at how a single speculative allegation in the Globe and Mail, about the prime minister’s office and the federal Attorney General (AG), has led to resignations, including that of the second most powerful person in Justin Trudeau’s government – Gerald Butts.
News is what’s in the newspapers. But there is zero evidence that anything illegal or even improper happened. Denials abound of direction-given and pressure-applied to the AG, and SNC is still going to court rather than getting its plea bargain. The only story here is how the media and opposition parties are colluding to ruin Trudeau’s chances in the upcoming election.
 Brown being chased by media after announcing his resignation as leader of the Progressive Conservative Party. There are troubling similarities with regard to the CTV report which ended Brown’s leadership of the Ontario Progressive Conservative party. The allegations that Brown, the teetotaler, had plied an under aged girl with booze for sex were false on at least a couple of counts. For one thing the girl wasn’t underage and she admitted that the sex had been consensual. It was an inaccurate story which the network retracted, amended, and corrected; and over which Brown is now suing them for eight million big ones.
If this wasn’t a total conspiracy it sure looked, smelled and behaved like it. No sooner had the CTV story broken than Brown’s key caucus members convened for a conference call, without Brown. And when Brown finally got wind of the call and joined in, they had one message for him – just resign and now. They weren’t interested in his side or the story. They had the smoking gun so who needed to wait for the finger prints to come back from the lab.
Then there were the staff resignations, almost on cue in a perfectly orchestrated pincer movement – the perfect trifecta for an almost instantaneous bring down. His three top advisors led the stampede with…“Earlier today, all three of us became aware of allegations about Patrick Brown. After speaking with him, our advice was that he should resign as Ontario PC Party leader. He did not accept that advice.”
 Alykhan Velshi, Brown’s chief of staff is a brilliant 30-something lawyer and policy analyst with credentials from the London School of Economics. He spent his formative years developing his skills as a neoconservative, first at the American Enterprise Institute and the Foundation for the Defence of Democracies, then as a political operative in the government of former PM Stephen Harper.
Velshi has an impressive political resume, working in Harper’s office and also advising ministers John Baird and Jason Kenny. In fact Brown had hired him on the strength of his time with Kenny. And Brown should have known that was going to be trouble. Kenny, the ultra-conservative, and Brown, the political centrist, never saw eye to eye, particularly after Kenny virtually blackmailed the MP Brown into voting against his will on an issue.
And Velshi is as far right wing politically as Brown is firmly in the center of today’s political world. Velshi had been responsible for developing the Tory opposition strategy to Liberal leader Stephane Dion’s ‘Green Tax Shift’ carbon tax proposal back in the mid 2000’s. How was he now supposed to get behind Brown’s policy of implementing a comparable carbon tax?
But Velshi swore up and down that he was on-side with fighting climate change and a carbon tax. That would have been a 180 degree turnaround from his earlier days peddling fellow ultra rightist Ezra Levant’s oxymoronic notion of ‘ethical oil’. But he was not the only obviously disingenuous Tory signing onto Brown’s policies.
 In fact almost all of caucus officially supported Brown’s ‘People’s Guarantee” which was endorsed at the party’s November 2017 policy conference. Though Velshi’s previous mentor, Albertan Jason Kenny, stormed out of the conference once he realized that a carbon tax was one of those policies.
There is no more reasonable explanation for what happened to Brown than the way he himself penned it in his book. If it wasn’t a set up, then we’ve all been watching too much TV, or too little. This was a perfect trifecta: mutineer-minded staff, a treacherous caucus and a damning news story.
Almost immediately after the CTV report Brown became a toxic commodity – an outcast ironically from the very party he had restored out of the ruins left him by former leader Tim Hudak. Brown was eventually evicted from caucus, disallowed candidacy to run again as MPP, and even refused the opportunity to run for Chair of Peel Region after Ford cancelled that election. Kathleen Wynne had been treated better.
Brown’s book may help identify the ‘how and why’, but it might take another book to identify the ‘who’ – who were the actual manipulators of this conspiracy. Doug Ford ended up the big winner – he wasn’t even in caucus back then. Carolyn Mulroney picked up some of his staff, but lost her bid anyway in the leadership campaign. And pretenders to the throne, Vic Fedeli and Christine Elliott, were left just out of the winners circle once again.
Brown’s former chief man Alykhan got his old job back working for interim leader, Vic Fedeli, until the provincial election when he got himself sweet-hearted into a plum job at Ontario Power Generation. Except that, in a puzzling move, Ford’s own chief of staff indirectly fired Alykhan before he’d even sat down at his new desk.
Perhaps, like the Mafia, the Ontario PCs like to bury the bodies of their worn out operatives themselves. And on that count , despite the law suits, this whole affair was just an internal thing, a PC family matter.
Maybe that is the real reason why it’s not in the news anymore?
Background material:
Brown Denial – Insane Month – Brown Defence Statement –
Brown’s Book – Ethical Oil – Alykhan Velshi –
Fired from OPG
 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.
Previous parts of the four part article.
The political take down of Patrick Brown – Part 1
Rivers on Patrick Brown – He said – she said – Part 2
Rivers on Patrick Brown – Part 3
 By Pepper Parr
February 21st, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Just how does the city budget get created and passed and what do the members of council do to ensure that tax payers are getting value for money?
Staff in the Finance department present a draft budget to city council
That draft is the result of a process that has each department putting together their budgets which gets vetted by a team that consists of senior staff, the Director of Finance and the city manager.
The public get to delegate on the draft budget.There was email feedback, there was a telephone town hall, the city made use of its Get Involved service that lets people say what they think on various issues. And then there was that button-holing that politicians have to live with from residents who want something for their special interest or community.
Members of Council inevitably have questions – with the current five new members of Council there is not only a steep learning curve but also a lot of questions that are often specific to their wards.
The following is a list of some of the questions individual council members asked. The name of the council member who posed the question is not provided – unfortunately.
Service: Recreation
Question: Securing Sponsorship Funds by Naming Corporate Assets
Who is responsible for generating sponsorship funds through the naming of corporate assets?
 The Haber Law Group got naming rights to the Recreation Centre in Alton for 20 years – paid millions. Response: To date, naming opportunities have been done on a project by project basis with Parks and Recreation staff usually taking the lead. A sponsorship package is approved by council and potential sponsors are sought. Most recently the city was successful in securing a naming opportunity for the Haber Recreation Center; unsuccessful in securing a sponsor for the renovated Nelson Outdoor Pool.
Funds secured are placed in a reserve to support future capital renewal of the asset that was named. There have been differences of opinion on whether the city should secure sponsorship for the overall name of an asset, with there being more comfort with naming components within an asset.
A review of the corporate sponsorship policy will be undertaken later in 2019, early 2020
 It was Regional budget dollars that paid for the re-build of New Street. Infrastructure no matter who pays – in the end it is coming out of your pocket. Question: What would be the impact on the overall 20-year asset management plan if the increase in the infrastructure renewal levy was decreased to 1% instead of 1.25% for this year, and what is that amount worth?
Response: A 0.25% decrease would reduce $400,000 of funding to the capital program in 2019 and $8 million of funding over the next 20 years ($24 million over the 60-year Asset Management Plan). $4 million of projects would need to be removed from the 10-year capital budget and forecast.
The capital projects impacted by the reduction risk higher costs in the future to complete and additional costs by the way of minor maintenance expenditures until the work can be done. The projects timing in the capital program is based on assessed condition, warranting the required work, deferring work can impact the resident’s experience and derived quality with the asset.
Question: Provide a list of statutory and discretionary development charge exemptions and a list of ineligible services.
Response: List of statutory and discretionary development charge exemptions and list of ineligible services:
The Development Charges Act along with regulation O.Reg. 82/98 provides legislated statutory development charge exemptions for the following:
• Industrial building expansions up to 50% of the gross floor area
• Intensification within existing residential developments with up to 2 additional dwelling units permitted within existing low-density dwellings and 1 additional dwelling unit permitted within medium and high-density dwellings
• Municipalities (City and Region)
• Board of Education and local board, as defined in the Education Act
The City’s existing DC by-law (46-2014) also provides non-statutory exemptions from payment of development charges with respect to:
• Hospital, excluding any portion of the lands, building or structures occupied by the tenant of the hospital
• A place of worship
• Conservation authority
• Seasonal structure and temporary venues
• Parking garages
• Agricultural uses
• Canopy (structure with one or no walls, ie. Gas pump islands)
Ineligible services:
In accordance with the Development Charges Act and O. Reg 82/98, a development charge by-law may not impose development charges to pay for increased capital costs, prescribed as ineligible service listed below:
• Cultural or entertainment facilities, including museums, theatres and art galleries
• Tourism facilities, including convention centres,
• Acquisition of land for parks, including woodlots
• Hospitals, as defined in the Public Hospitals Act
• Landfill sites and services
• Facilities and services for the incineration of waste
• Headquarters for general administration of municipalities and local boards
• Lands for parks, includes land for woodlots and land because it is environmentally sensitive
Project: Funding for Capital Projects from Parks and Recreation Reserve Funds
Question: How are the reserve funds managed and what amount of funding is coming from them for capital projects?
Response: The Parks and Recreation Department utilizes reserve funds to partially support capital initiatives for the repair and renewal of facilities and associated program amenities/enhancements in the Organized Sport Support, Recreation and Culture service areas.
 Angela Coughlan Pool Reserve Funds related to facilities and programs are funded by a 5% surcharge place on user fees. Funds from these Reserve Funds are used to offset a portion of capital costs related to repair, renewal and enhancement of facilities and programs in the asset type, for example; surcharges collected at Angela Coughlan Pool would be placed in the “Pools” Reserve Fund and used for pools asset renewal projects.
Projects presented through the capital budget that are funded or partially funded through Reserve Funds illustrate details as such under the budget summary.
Service: Municipal Law Enforcement (additional By-law Enforcement
Question: Bylaw: getting from 6 (proposed budget) to 8: I understand Parks and Recreation have a parks enforcement office, and parking enforcement is also separate from bylaw. Can we redeploy a parks and rec, and a parking officer to bylaw to bring the total bylaw complement to 8 officers? Or redeploy one officer from animal control to bylaw to achieve one of the 2.
Response: Parks and Recreation have Park Ambassadors who work with sports groups on proper park etiquette and problem-solving issues (lights on, lights off etc). These are part- time staff who work in summer months.
Parking Enforcement is contracted out to a 3rd party provider (Core Commissionaires) and the enforcement officers are not City employees.
Moving an animal enforcement officer would result in service reductions to customers and Animal Control Enforcement overall. This would impact the work the animal enforcement officers do on investigations, ticketing, and coyote management (as examples).
Service: Road and Sidewalk Maintenance
 Would this stretch of sidewalk qualify? Question: What would be the cost of plowing the pathway at Brant Hills Community Centre? Are there any other locations not currently maintained in the winter?
Response: The additional cost to maintain this pathway is minimal and could be accommodated however there are significant safety concerns during freeze/thaw conditions given the hilly nature of the pathway.
There is a further 57 km of footpaths not in the road allowance that are not maintained in the winter. To maintain all of these pathways in the winter would require significant resources including additional staffing and capital equipment.
Given the significant amount of work and resources required to partially implement the new minimum maintenance standards on sidewalks adding additional footpaths is not recommended at this time.
Service: Transit
 What would free transit cost the city? Question: What is the cost to provide seniors with free transit between 9:30 am and 3:30 pm Monday to Friday?
Response: The estimated cost is $300,000 for conventional transit and $60,000 for para-transit service.
Service: Recreation
Question: What expansion have we done to the pickleball program to address demand?
Response: We have been successful at obtaining grant funding to support a program expansion at various locations throughout the city. To date, we have also considered partnering to maintain this program expansion as well as looking to convert outdoor tennis courts, in specific target areas, to outdoor pickleball courts. Funding ends after this year. To date, all program expansions have had to be funded by grants which is not sustainable.
Service: Recreation and Organized Sports
Question: Have we been able to meet the community need in terms of fee assistance and other similar type requests?
Response: To date, we are able to meet the demand we receive through the various funds available such as Community Matching Fund, Fee Waiver and Fee assistance programs. Financial assistance is supported in part by the tax base and also by external funders / donors.
Service: Local Boards
 Performing Arts Centre get a substantial subsidy. Question: What savings would be achieved by holding the boards and Committees to 1.5% across the board instead of 2%?
Response: The total savings of reducing the city’s contribution to the local boards to a 1.5% increase instead of a 2% increase would be $75,457 as detailed below:
Service: Corporate Expenditures (VDRF)
Question: Can the provision to VDRF (Vehicle Depreciation Reserve Fund) be reduced? Showing a $402K increase.
Response: The Vehicle Depreciation Reserve Fund is used to fund the replacement of the city’s Fleet vehicles (excluding conventional buses). The policy approved in 2018 is to increase the provision by 4% annually. In addition, $270,000 of tax supported funding previously required for debt charge repayment (see $500k reduction in debt charges) was restated to support the Handi-van renewal requirements. Handi-vans were previously replaced using funding from gas taxes.
Service: General – HR Budget Summary
Question: Why is HR up 7.1%? Is this the head count increase?
Response: 7.1% HR increase includes business case requests as well as the base budget. Base budget increase is 4.8% and when you exclude the regulatory/contractual obligations as well as the 2 staff for Halton Hills fire communications and the road patroller that is funded by the Region, the base budget increase for HR is 3%.
Question: What is the total amount of budget reductions required to get the increase to 2.99%?
Response: $1.6 million of on-going savings would be required to reduce the proposed budget from 3.99% to 2.99%.
The challenge for this new city council is determining what will be cut? Will this council focus on projects in their wards or will they take a longer term approach and structure the budget to ensure that the public gets value for the money spent.
We will report on that debate which takes place today.
 The seven members of city council who sit in this renovated council chamber will decide just what your tax bill is going to amount to.
By Pepper Parr
February 20th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
 Ward 2 Councillor Lisa Kearns – possibly a real McCoy. We knew she was going to be different when she made that “phony baloney” comment at one of her early ward meetings. Ward 2 Councillor Lisa Kearns was talking about the “stuff that was coming out of the Transportation department.
When when she turned to the Clerk at one of her early budget meetings and asked: “Do I talk now” we were seeing the real McCoy.
During the first month she was in office Kearns said that she was going to create a Business Registry. Anyone wanting to talk to her about a business matter would have to sign the Registry so that her constituents would know who she was talking to. We don’t yet know how detailed that Registry is going to be – just that there will be one and that it will become public starting at the end of March.
Here is what Ward 2 City Councillor Lisa Kearns has on her city hall information page:
How many of the other council members have said they will create a Registry? Has the Mayor created a Registry for the people that ask to meet with her?
The next Ward 2 Community Update meeting:
Thursday, Feb. 28 2019
7 p.m. – 8 p.m.- doors open at 6:30 pm at the Burlington Public Library, Holland Room – 2331 New Street.
 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.
|
|
