 By Lisa Kearns
April 25th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Engaged Citizens of Burlington (ECoB) is a not for profit group working towards a better Burlington for generations to come.
 Lisa Kearns – part of the ECoB leadership team. Is there more than ECoB in her future? Working within the civic process, we are particularly concerned with issues of planning and development. The group is energized to bring voices and action to challenges that will affect the quality of life today and in the future, we are advocates for good planning across the entire City.
In the months from inception, ECoB has held an open meeting, a rally, a municipal elections workshop, hand delivered thousands of flyers, displayed hundreds of lawn signs, received press, appeared on community television and radio, grown our social media base, inspired a record number of delegations, met with provincial and municipal elected officials, city planning, business owners, developers and most importantly residents.
We have reflected on our position on the matters contained in the Draft Official Plan and truly reflect to objectively determine if we are the outliers, to see if were the radicals, to see if there was any truth to the tactics used to silence us. And here’s the thing, we are not. What we are – are concerned residents and now we are engaged.
From fragmented pockets across the city have woven together to tell the same story – we are not against growth – we are against excessive intensification and loss of community. The same Provincial Policy Statements are used in every development justification report and the same committee and council allow the most obtuse interpretation of these guidelines to promote efficient land use and development patterns. The same policies that govern Toronto and Mississauga have only one safety net in place and that is our Municipal Official Plan. That is why today is so important.
In previous delegations, residents and ECoB have set out specific areas for reconsideration. We asked to have the bar set higher – in the spirit of vibrancy to increase the uses in the Brant Main Precinct, we were successful in receiving a “should” contain three uses in the three storey podiums that extinguish our unique downtown retail. We talked about employment land designations and the ability to keep the door open for future considerations, we saw uproar that ensued from our agricultural friends.
 Kearns at the podium during the ECoB candidates meeting. We know you are aware there is a deficiency here and that is why the City has actively taken steps to ignore and deduce the consistent wave of pushing into this process.
The number of drafts that have come out, the inability to build a model that neighbourhood kids could complete, the inadvertent scheduling conflicts, the refusal to meet by some Councillors, the letter from the City Manager to silence instead of collaborate, thrown out petitions, NIMBY lawn signs in every ward, minutes of grow bold videos that hardly scratch the surface #growbold, #goodplanningmatters, and the most stinging “just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t good planning”.
Right down to the special meeting of Council scheduled directly after this Committee meeting – how is anything from the 30+ delegations today going to receive due process and influence the vote tomorrow?
And aren’t quite done. There is still the Transit Plan, the Transportation Plan, the Mobility Hub Plan, the secondary phase of the Downtown Area Specific Plan. The challenges are still ahead and if we cannot all be on the same page with the most important City document, we most certainly will be challenged in the phases that shape our future.
Here’s the thing, planning is suggestive and without doubt a challenging task and profession. While we know that we’ve been a pain we also want you to know that we do respect the work that has been done and hope that if anything, this pressure will give you more support to create a plan that is built exclusively for our great city.
We need to call a truce.
 ECoB’s first large community meeting – they had traction and a following. We are not against growth, we are not against change. But we are against it done poorly, done in a way that contravenes protection of established neighbourhoods, a way that cannot audit the 5% growth, cannot protect our own green space, and in a way that will ebb and flow as supporting plans come forward. We have asked for a complete vision and are no where close.
We are asking for help because it is not Ok to extend permissions for 18+ stories abutting low density residential, it is not Ok to allow in-congruent infill, it is not Ok to allow hundreds of town homes that double the density permissions, it is not Ok to push residents in Alton village, Pinedale, Bluewater/ Avondale, Dynes, Aldershot and more to the very edge – where the only option is seeking relief from the municipal tribunal.
It is not Ok to leave every resident wondering when they are going to have to become experts in the planning process that they have entrusted to those before us. Let’s make sure that the balance in in our favour now.
The province has mandated growth, we recognize that there needs to be growth, but is it councils responsibility to protect community. The question is does any of this document actually enforce a successful and complete community. We need the Committee to insist that amenities are included not just residential. It is about quality of life and not quantity of people. We seem to be more focused on getting people out of the city instead of keeping people in the city – embedded into their communities through a live, work and play approach.
We have tried everything possible to bring a sense of balance, to bring a better vision, to bring a complete plan and we are exhausted. We have asked, does the city want to fight with the residents or against the residents, only you can decide with the vote today.
And so, with the last chance to address this Draft Official Plan today we ask you to let down your guard, let us in, and really hear your residents. We continually hear Staff ask – “is this plan defensible”, and yet the bigger question is “is this plan accountable?”.
This is the last chance to be accountable to residents today and residents in the future.
Lisa Kearns is a downtown Burlington resident who has been instrumental in creating ECoB – Engaged Citizens of Burlington.
By Tom Muir
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
I have a number of comments and concerns, based on some of my experience for the last several years, regarding the staff bring forward of this new OP with recommendation for adoption.
1. This new OP is not complete, and not good planning practice to adopt at this time with piecemeal structure and many loose ends. It is lacking in accuracy, details, and clarity.
There are 3 Mobility Hubs Plans that are an inherent part of this OP, that are incomplete. These will not be reviewed publicly and given Planning Act due diligence process until possibly early 2019.
The PPS/Planning Act specifies the need for a transportation systems plan, freight support plan, a transit support plan, and an active transportation plan. There are none of these complete and available to inform council, the public and decision-makers.
All those thousands of unaccounted for vehicles are not going to disappear because the planners refuse to recognize they exist.
There are other components of the proposed plan needing publicly settled that are incomplete.
The truth is the important planning pieces that are needed are data and facts, not all kinds of assumptions and fact-less assertions.
Taken collectively, the assertions, assumptions, and conclusions, made in support of recommending adoption of the proposed OP, are not substantiated by an evidence-based research design that can predict the future, and are professionally frowned on statements that overreach the research design.
 I cannot say, or agree, with the ability of the City and staff to deal with this lack of key information, and failure to implement the Planning Act/PPS, and yet they still recommend adopting an incomplete OP that has demonstrated such a lot of public opposition and continues to demonstrate this opposition tonight.
Again, I say this is not good planning, and this should be obvious, and seems to be to ordinary citizens.
You owe it to us all that you pretty much need to know, and be able to tell us on facts, that this Plan is going to work as you say. But you don’t know that.
However, what people do know is that walk, bike, and bus is not going to work for people, not in Burlington for a lot of practical reasons, so open your eyes and see.
With your focus on intensification, everything else is assumed to fit, when you should be doing the planning to make it fit.
Residents want you to be able to make the intensification fit so the Plan can fly. Plan it to work, now.
Right now, for numerous current applications – Plains Rd, Brant St, Downtown etc.- the density asked for simply has to be based on reduced standards of everything in order to squeeze it in, and if that has to be done then it doesn’t meet the PPS and needs of the existing OP and by-laws.
 Pigs don’t fly? This won’t work because the parts don’t fit together. Pigs don’t fly.
2. Over the last few years, I have delegated severally on this OP over the process, and on a significant number of specific applications in Ward 1 Aldershot, Ward 2 Downtown, and issues related to transportation, transit, and the biking plan.
So I know what I have seen and heard, repeatedly, about what needed information is really missing and how some at the City insist that this missing information does not matter, and the city must move ahead without this key business information, and it must be done right now.
I don’t think this is anywhere good enough.
No matter when the proposed OP is approved by Council, and becomes “informative” only, not “in force”, the Mobility Hubs and the other missing plans I mentioned, are still not informative or in force until first approved by City Council, then the Region, which means it does not exist until then.
So then the Planning Act/PPS says the existing OP is required to be used, must be framed in this OP framed local context, and most important, this OP is to implement the PPS.
What is not to be considered is the language of a non-existent OP, and non-existent Mobility Hubs, and non-existent plans for transportation, transit, active transportation, and so on.
I must ask how all this that does not exist yet, is to be complied with in good faith, in such a situation where developers, not to mention the politicians and managers, are steadily trying to indoctrinate the planning staff, (ongoing in time with the proposed OP development), to encourage and approve density and form of a non-existent, not in force, and not policy relevant OP, or planning concepts and ideas?
In my observation and experience in this, I simply have to question how the Planning staff are supposed to retain their professional objectivity, and serve the public interest, when they are bombarded with this language from developers, and more so, in my view, badgered and cajoled by some insistent members of Council, and some City managers, to adopt and to act out the same directions?
With all this shoving and encouraging density and form at them, how can the planners be objective?
I’m telling you to let the planners do their job. I have seen myself some of you just not do that, but interject in questions to planners at meetings.
I have seen, and been told enough, not to think that they are not being unduly influenced about what to do.
We all know there can be a fine scary line between professional integrity and having a job.
I provide here one section from the OPPI Professional Code of Practice for your information.
2 PROFESSIONAL CODE OF PRACTICE
1.0 The Planner’s Responsibility to the Public Interest
Members have a primary responsibility to define and serve the interests of the public. This requires the use of theories and techniques of planning that inform and structure debate, facilitate communication. and foster understanding. Accordingly, a Member shall:
1.1 practice in a manner that respects the diversity, needs, values and aspirations of the public and encourages discussion on these matters;
1.2 provide full, clear and accurate information on planning matters to decision makers and members of the public, while recognizing both the client’s right to confidentiality and the importance of timely recommendations;
1.3 acknowledge the inter-related nature of planning decisions and their consequences for individuals, the natural and built environment, and the broader public interest; and
1.4 identify and promote opportunities for meaningful participation in the planning process to all interested parties.
I don’t have the time here to explain these, however, I have said what I mean and I say again, let them do their professional and objective duty.
And give the residents and Council the critical information needed to inform us all before things get decided, and to keep the faith.
 Tom Muir is an Aldershot resident who has been delegating for more than 30 years. He understands the process better than many of the members of council. He is blunt, direct and usually exceptionally well informed. He is a ward Councillors worst dream. And he loves what he does,
By Jim Young
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
For years now everybody has known that the OMB was a very developer friendly organization.
Its decisions usually favoured developer’s amendments over official plans and that in any fight for increased density or increased height the developer would win and the citizens would lose.
 Jim Young – delegating to city council. That changed recently. The new Local Planning Appeal Tribunal LPAT will be much more cognizant of city official plans and will apparently favour Official Plans in effect at the time of any appeal.
The current Official Plan is the plan that would have to be considered by LPAT. That’s the plan that has low to medium heights all the way up Brant St. and limits intensification and height to around the go stations.
So if a developer were to take the city to LPAT today, LPAT would probably rule in favour of the heights laid out in the existing plan.
For years developers have bought up land on Brant street, the core and along Plains Rd knowing that the city Official Plan limits would be easily over ruled at the old OMB. City council accepted some drastic amendments knowing that the OMB would do just that.
Now there is a good chance that a similar appeal to the LPAT would result in the present heights in the present official plan being upheld.
That would be good news for citizens but bad news for Developers.
On TV recently Councillor Sharman defended a council position that since developers investments cannot break even until their building plans exceed 16/17 storeys, it is incumbent upon city council to help them achieve this. He repeated this statement at a meeting I attended with ECoB, City Planning and Himself. This philosophy seems to be shared by a majority on council.
So if developers need at least 16 storeys to break even and current city plans limit heights to between 4 and 12 storeys downtown where can a developer go?
They can’t go to LPAT, because LPAT may well favour the current city official Plan Heights and rule in favour of the lower heights.
The only alternative was to go to a developer friendly city council and ask for a New Official Plan that would permit higher buildings in the downtown core making any future appeal to LPAT more plan friendly and therefore more developer friendly.
And that is exactly what our New Official Plan has become. A permit for Developers to build higher while avoiding the risk of losing arguments at the New LPAT.
All the talk of Grow Bold, Urban Growth Centres, Downtown Mobility Hubs and Special Development Precincts have simply been a smoke screen to cloak a very developer friendly plan in a veneer of planning respectability.
That also explains the rush to get the plan on to the books. The longer the old plan remains in effect the longer the developers are left holding properties they cannot turn into profits. This is a serious cash flow and business problem for them.
So from a somewhat banal project to review the official plan starting seven years ago, suddenly as the OMB LPAT differences became obvious last year, the push was on to get this done.
The only delays that were allowed were to help council to be clearer on exactly what was being proposed, to give staff the time to tweak the plan to ensure that the “Special Development Precincts” were exactly where the developers owned property, while dressing it up as “Public Consultation”. We are now at the 3rd or 4th rewrite I believe of this Official Plan.
 Jim Young As I recall the original plan was to have it adopted by council and submitted to the region by November last year. It has now been delayed three or four times, once for council, once for staff once to allow a regional agricultural mapping inclusion. It seems it can be delayed for just about anybody or anything except the people it most impacts. The people of Burlington.
At least one member of council, a large number of private delegations, delegations on behalf of various citizen advocacy groups asked time and time again if this process might be delayed to allow the people of Burlington greater input and real engagement in the process and then put the plan to them in the upcoming election. Every attempt to delay that process to allow greater citizen engagement or input was rejected by council.
Now we know why.
It seems we can delay the adoption of this extremely unpopular official plan for Councillors, for city staff, for developers and even for the region. Yet when your citizens, your constituents, your voters suggest it be delayed we are told NO!
Now we know why.
We are told that the Official Plan is way too important to delay it and allow the final say by the very people it is supposed to be written for, The Citizens of Burlington, Rural, Urban and Downtown who will have to live with it for the next several decades.
Now we know why.
Now that the citizens of Burlington are becoming aware of the reasons for rushing this flawed and developer friendly plan through council, very much against their wishes, they are mobilising to defeat it in the upcoming election.
Across the city from Alton to Aldershot and in every area in between groups are looking for candidates who will oppose and overturn this Official Plan. Candidates who will rewrite it with real input from citizens whose views have been so ignored and overlooked in this truly terrible Official Plan Process. Candidates who will fight to make citizen engagement a reality in Burlington.
The issue you tried to hide from the electorate will be front and centre in that campaign and you will be reminded of the folly of ignoring your citizens when the votes are counted in October.
If you choose to be the candidates who still, after all these delegations, after all these raised protest voices are still not listening, still not getting it, the electorate have the right to ask: “Are you with the citizens or the developers?”
You cannot continue to ignore us and claim you are with both.
 The choice will be ours. It is not too late. You can still delay this, still fulfill the wishes of your citizens. Or you can go ahead and adopt it. The choice is yours and in a democracy that is as it should be.
Just remember – come October, the choice will be ours and in a democracy that too, is as it should be.
 By Pepper Parr
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
It was as if there were sharks in the water who had smelled blood and they were moving in for the kill.
Tough enough that unhappy citizens were delegating and saying the equivalent of “we don’t want you to do this” – add to that some of the best legal talent that the developers are able to hire and land use planners that know their stuff.
Time and again the consultants were asking staff – “where are the supporting documents”.
The phrase – “you can’t do that” was mouthed by more than one consultant.
Staff are on the ropes – but there wasn’t a referee in the ring to count them out and let them crawl out of the ring with their noses bloodied and their bodies bruised.
Council has been able to scoff at and denigrate the citizen delegations – they couldn’t get away with that with the professional talent that took long strips from their hides.
There is a lot of “splainin” to do.
The pace at which delegations appear – ten minutes of presentation followed by Q&A with the delegator. One delegation told the Chair that she was representing four clients – ergo – 40 minutes.
The afternoon meeting had to be extended for more than an hour – one Councillor had to leave early – health concerns dictated a break.
The Chair had to clamp down on the audience – no clapping. One delegator came close to being asked to leave the podium – he was smacking them.
Far too often the documents weren’t on hand and at times the material was so detailed and dense in terms of content that time was needed to read it over a couple of times and think about it.
It was hard to keep up with the number of deferrals that were being asked for.
Does staff and or council not have the capacity to pause and ask: We are not there yet – is that because we are going in the wrong direction?
Not only is this embarrassing, it is so unprofessional. There are some really fine people in the Planning department who just might be freshening up their resumes – the Burlington Planning department is not the really decent place to work that it was when a different Director of Planning was in place.
And it isn’t over yet – council meets again this evening and again on Wednesday and on the 30th if need be.
Is there not a doctor in the house that can step in and put a stop to the planning carnage?
Salt with Pepper is the musings, reflections, observations and opinions of the publisher of the Gazette
 By Staff
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Time to dust off your golf clubs and shine your shoes.
The City of Burlington’s Tyandaga Golf Course will officially open for the 2018 golf season on Saturday, April 28.
 5, 803 yards of scenic terrain and 18 holes Tyandaga offers memberships, tournaments, clinics, private lessons, men’s and women’s league play, and in-season and off-season rentals. The course combines a perfect mix of urban convenience with rural beauty, natural waterways, contours and mature trees as well as dining and catered private or corporate events.
Players wishing to book a tee time can do so online at www.tyandagagolf.com.
Tyandaga Golf Course is an 18-hole course with 5, 803 yards of scenic terrain characterized by its natural waterways and broadleaf woods
Spring specials on green fees include $45 to ride in a golf cart and $30 for golfers that are walking
 By Staff
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Burlington Transit’s report card improved slightly over the past year and about 100 transit users and community activists left the fourth annual Transit Users’ Forum at the Seniors’ Centre Apr. 21 with a renewed sense of optimism for the future of the city’s bus system.
 With some of the highest transit fares in the whole of the GTA a B- for fares looks a little too generous. Burlington Transit Director Sue Connor told the meeting she is committed to seeing steady improvement in service and is hoping for support from City Council.
Burlington MPP Eleanor McMahon outlined millions of dollars in extra provincial funding for the system. Participants also got the chance to question Connor and a panel of community transit advocates at the forum, sponsored by BFAST (Burlington for Accessible Sustainable Transit) and 13 other community organizations.
New fall schedules will make use of new equipment and personnel to ease the strain on the system, Connor reported. She said she was frustrated that improvements could not be made faster but many technical issues had to be fixed. “You have to fix your foundation before you build you house.”
Drawing on her experience as Director of Brampton’s system, Connor said Burlington Transit would investigate establishing a grid system of routes that she said would get passengers to their destination more quickly.
15-minute service
 Sue Conner with a smile that transit users would like to see more often. She has a challenging task ahead of her. “It won’t be long before we have 15-minute service to the three GO stations in Burlington,” she said. “We have to be prepared for that.”
“Although there’s still a lot to do, I have to recognize that City Council made a big investment in transit in 2017 and 2018. And I think that was a remarkable step and hopefully we can keep that momentum going,” she said.
Connor praised BFAST for organizing the forum. “Their insight into transit in Burlington has certainly helped me, in my early days, to see what some of the issues are,” she said.
BFAST Chair Doug Brown urged Burlington’s city council to do its part by raising per-capita funding above its current rank of lowest in the GTA.
 Doug Brown breaks into a smile every time he sees a new bus being put into service. “Transit investment saves cities money. Brown said. “It does not result in additional spending, it results in long term savings. You need less road capacity, you need less maintenance, you need less parking, you’ve got all the health benefits of lower emissions and the list goes on an on.”
Strategic investments
 Burlington MPP Eleanor McMahon engaging ECoB member Penny Hersh in conversation. Burlington MPP and President of the Treasury Board Eleanor McMahon said the government was reversing a previous pattern of downloading responsibilities and costs to municipalities.
“It’s important that we continue to make strategic investments in transit infrastructure in Burlington,” she said.
“Burlington will receive an extraordinary $45 million in public transit funding” as a result of a federal-provincial agreement detailed in an announcement a week ago, she said.
Recent school closings will also affect demand for transit, warned a trustee for the Halton District School Board. Connor reported that Burlington Transit was now meeting regularly with school-board transportation officers on issues like these.
The bus bays on the north side of the Burlington GO station will finally move back to the south in 2019, Connor reported. But designers of the station renovation left room for only six bays on the south side. “I have not been able to get an answer from Metrolinx” on the reason for the shortfall, she said. Burlington Transit is studying construction of a bus bay on Fairview St., a short walk to the station, but final plans would not be ready until 2019.
 There was a time when transit staff suggested to city council that the terminal be closed – now t has been upgraded to a part of a mobility hub. The downtown terminal will have improved hours, from 8am to 6pm on weekdays and 9 to 6 on Saturdays “and we will not be closed a half hour for lunch,” Connor said.
Presto cards more available
Transit users applauded the news that a deal is being finalized to make Presto fare cards available at seven Shoppers’ Drug mart locations across the city. And they welcomed the announcement that the downtown terminal will be open longer and will not be closed during lunch hour.
The marks on this year’s transit report card, decided by the roughly 100 people in attendance, improved slightly from last year. While the system’s drivers once again got an A and fares got a B-minus, passenger info got C-minus and convenience and schedules got an E. The BFAST Steering Committee awarded a D to City Council on the budget issue, saying last year’s infusion helped but more commitment is needed.
 The 4th annual Bfast Transit Forum drew a healthy crowd. They left the event with some hope in their hearts. Now to elect a city council that will fund the service, Those were among the highlights of the half-day meeting, which saw a number of provincial and municipal candidates in attendance. Ward 2 Councillor and mayoral candidate Marianne Meed Ward welcomed participants in the absence of Mayor Rick Goldring, who was out of town for the event. Former MP and current mayoral hopeful Mike Wallace also attended.
By Lisa Kearns
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
This delegation sets out my position on item PB 33-18 – Community Benefits 421-431 Brant St. as Jim Young has delegated on behalf of ECoB this evening.
 Aaron A. Moore, Phd and expert on urban politics and public policy penned the IMFG Paper on Municipal Finance and Governance said the most common rationales used to invoke and justify the use of Section 37, more broadly know as density bonusing are:
• funding related infrastructure upgrades
• sharing the wealth created by development
• compensating those negatively affected by the development
In review of the 421 Brant St. Inc. report, there are few indirect infrastructure supporting benefits. With the longer vision of pedestrian-oriented flex street and the impending anchor mobility hub provisions the closest benefits are:
 • $150K in streetscape improvements coupled with $250K in setbacks/widened view corridors.
In my analysis, much of this can be takes as part of the 5% parkland dedication and the initiative to broaden the streetscape could have been reviewed by increasing Schedule O in the Draft Official Plan to widen Brant Street from Lakeshore Rd. to Caroline Ave greater than the current 18m in order to satisfy the Main Street function of: Table 1 Transportation Facilities. 2.4. Main Streets:
Serve the Downtown Urban Centre and the urban corridor that connects the Downtown Mobility Hub to the Burlington GO Mobility Hub;
Support mixed use places that contain a pedestrian-oriented public realm and street-oriented buildings;
Accommodate high levels of pedestrian and cycling activity and transit service, and moderate levels of vehicular traffic, typically within narrower rights of way;
Accommodate a moderate to high degree of people-moving capacity.
One way this could be interpreted is that the negotiators of this Report PB-33-18 have in part, bought benefits they didn’t necessarily have to and could have drafted the benefits the City finds favourable into the draft official plan, which this application is required to be in compliance of, when this was perhaps a missed opportunity, in part and adds up to nearly a quarter of the value of the total benefits.
Did we negotiate too specific and too early?
Not limited to direct funding for infrastructure upgrades, cost avoidance for future pressures on infrastructure can fall in this same category. This is where I will allocate the provision of green technology and sustainable architecture. At an indirect community benefit of $300K, LEED certification standards and/or compliance with the City’s Sustainable Building and Development Guidelines have been negotiated.
Appendix E in report PB-62-17 draws in the Burlington Sustainable Development Committee which has recognition under the current OP provides that “to the greatest extent possible, proposed development shall be consistent with the goals of sustainable development”. While the general concept of this building is acceptable, there is no evidence of stewardship initiatives in the plans to use LEED at a certified level although a willingness was verbally indicated. Why include this benefit at the application phase when it can be advantageous at the bonusing stage, perhaps the weight should have been greater in the public comments to prevent this crossroads.
Sharing the wealth created by development. There is no doubt that there is a financial consideration in a project this large, we know that from the Altus Group Economic Report and the uptick in development revenues in the City budget, not to mention the on going tax base increase. But just how much is the increased height really worth and how should this be spread out amongst the indirect parties. While not nearly enough to purchase even one unit in this property, $300K in cash is better than the single option negotiated in the 4853 Thomas Alton Blvd. report PB-16-16 which requires commitment from a housing provider to deliver affordable housing on a long term basis.
 Kearns wants Carriage Gate developer Nick Carnacelli to think in terms of the opportunity for the applicant to help drive value out of being in a position of power for the community. Where I do take exception is to the Applicants’s previous delegation in such an absolute statement that “the Region of Halton does not have an affordable housing plan and the City does not have a program”, that is not to say that this excuses or discounts the real need and concern for housing affordability. In fact this is where an opportunity for the applicant to help drive value out of being in a position of power for the community by spearheading inclusivity through the Section 37 provisions.
A hard look should be taken on if this was the best we could get. Going beyond shouldn’t be just going beyond height, it should be going beyond basic requirements and setting the foundation to create a demographic mix that contributes to our vibrant downtown.
Toronto Star columnist Andrew Keenan muses that the purpose of Section 37 in the Planning act is to offset the problems caused by changes to a neighbourhood when different kinds of developments are added to it, such as to compensate for increased traffic, population, or changes to the streetscape new developments bring. We would deduce that the bigger the problems, the bigger the benefits.
The list of problems with this application have been captured through online comments, delegations, written submissions, coffee shop talks, emails and a current of anxiety and unease through the community. One resident’s submission on May 15, 2017 summed it up concisely, her excerpt reads“…insufficient parking for residents, only 2 elevators, no parking for visitiors, no parking for commercial tenants, change to the individual shops along Brant with a design that is completely out of context visually with the neighbourhood, shadows and traffic…this proposal does not belong in this location”.
 What will the impact of the 421 Brant development be on city hall – not just the physical impact but the impact on the way the city is going to grow. Alas, the Section 37 Benefits – a hefty $400K in privately accessible visitor parking, a quarter of the benefits to keep visitors out of the already contentious parking needs of the downtown. This could be viewed as a benefit, however, does it address parking for the 900 square meters of retail space? At minimum the recommendation for retail store stand alone is 1.5 spaces per 100 GFA that’s a minimum of 13 spaces, but we have 8. The comparison is easy to make that other stand alone retail doesn’t offer on site parking, however, if we are afforded a chance to improve this at the foundational level, does 8 private spaces address the spaces lost with no net benefit?
This provision is meant to compensate residents for the real or perceived effects of development by providing for new amenities in the neighbourhood. Public art, a covered promenade, and the remaining benefits do little to offset the anger that has swelled in the community around this application. There are no open community amenities, no greenspace compensation for more trees, nothing. These negotiations do not even come close to anointing the damage the neighbourhood perceives and feels.
The delegation, deferred from the last meeting, was to ask Committee to simply afford the public the same opportunity that the applicant was given to have an opportunity to openly delegate and tell this committee if they have succeeded in negotiating Section 37 benefits that truly align with building an engaging city, good governance and community building.
We know our City could have done better to Grow Smart, not just Bold.
 Lisa Kerns is a downtown Burlington resident and an active member of ECoB – Engaged Citizens of Burlington. She is also a self admitted policy wonk – she digs and figures out just what much of the baffle-gab means.
 By Staff
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
It is always difficult when a member of the team you work with steps outside the accepted boundaries and action has to be taken.
Yesterday Staff Sergeant Brad Murray, a 16-year-member of the Halton Regional Police Service (HRPS) entered a guilty plea before a Judge in the Milton Court House.
Murray pled guilty to one count of Breach of Trust in relation to thefts from the Service’s evidence vault.
Sentencing has been put over until 9:00 a.m. on June 7, 2018, in the Ontario Court of Justice in Milton.
 Murray was arrested on May 28, 2017 and charged with two counts of Breach of Trust, two counts of Theft Under, and one count of Obstruct Justice. These charges stemmed from an internal audit and a subsequent independent investigation into HRPS drug vault anomalies that occurred between August 2015 and April 2016.
Upon his arrest, Murray was suspended, with pay, a requirement of the Police Services Act, the only suspension currently allowed under the current Act.
Murray was investigated by the Toronto Police Service and prosecuted by a Crown from outside of this jurisdiction to ensure a fair and independent assessment of the evidence.
Staff Sergeant Murray still faces disciplinary procedures under the Police Services Act. It should be noted that the Police Services Act proceedings arise out of the same facts that underlie the criminal charges that were laid against Murray in 2017. One of the possible outcomes upon a finding of misconduct is Murray’s dismissal from the Halton Regional Police Service and termination of his employment.
Chief Stephen Tanner stated, “I am pleased to have learned that a guilty plea to the criminal charge of breach of trust was entered by Staff Sergeant Brad Murray in criminal court in Milton earlier today. This is just one step in the disciplinary process. Now that the criminal component has been concluded, we will proceed with the internal disciplinary process. One of the outcomes that is possible through the Police Services Act hearing process would be dismissal from the service and termination of employment”.
By Pepper Parr
April 23rd, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
It was a Transit Forum that had people applauding and for the most part leaving the room satisfied that there were going to be changes made to the bus service in the city.
The public got their first chance to listen to the new Director of Transit, Sue Connor, who came to Burlington from Brampton where she turned that operation around. Transit users in Burlington are hoping she can do the same thing here.
 Jim Young joined Director of Transit Sue Connor on a panel discussion Connor came across as a little on the humble side. She admitted that there are problems and she believes they can be fixed but the fixing is going to take time and she will need money from the city to make it all happen.
Which of course has been Burlington’s problem for the past decade – the city has not been willing to put money into transit – shaving and paving the roads is where the dollars have gone.
Bfast founder Doug Brown cautioned Connor not to get fixated on just the capital side – the buying of new buses and fancy technology – he wanted to see dollars going into operations.
Connor talked of transit as a business – Brown cautioned her on that too – transit is a service he said.
The 4th Annual Transit Forum was the largest ever held – the event had to take place at the Seniors’ Centre where a larger room was available.
There were a number of differences this year – the city manager sent his deputy but she didn’t say a word.
Other than Marianne Meed Ward there wasn’t a city Councillor in sight. The Mayor was reported to be out of the country and ward 3 Councillor John Taylor was on a vacation – in Amsterdam.
With that kind of council member attendance one can get a sense as to how big a task Sue Connors has ahead of her.
 Ward 3 city council candidate Rory Nisan on the right with community advocate Gary Scobie in the center The hope, perhaps, is that there were at least five people who have announced they are running for office in the October municipal election.
There were a number of school board trustees in the room: Leah Reynolds and Richelle Papin.
Some people thought a new transit plan was going to be announced – that didn’t happen but the audience certainly heard about the $45 million the province has showered on the city for transportation. Eleanor McMahon, Burlington’s MPP, who is also running for re-election, said that we are “entering a golden age for transit”
 Burlington MP Eleanor McMahon on the left in full campaign mode bending Penny Hersh’s ear during a break in the Bfast Forum. She added that communities on the Lakeshore East and West GO lines will be the first to get 15 minute service – no date though on just when that will happen.
Doug Brown pointed out that Burlington has already experienced a golden age for bus transit – in 1982 the city has 15 minute service on every bus route.
He said that 2012 was a disastrous year for transit – gas tax money that went to transit was reduced from 30% to 20% and half a million dollars was taken out of the transit budget. A transportation Master Plan at the time took another half a million out of the budget by cutting back on the number of routes and service frequency.
Up until very recently Burlington didn’t offer any transit service on both Christmas and New Years Day.
Connor is working on a new plan for transit and moving at least some of the service from the current radial approach to more of a grid system. She wants to create a five year plan – her challenge is going to be to get it funded.
 Transit and intensification are joined at the hip in Burlington. Citizens had wanted the city to prepare a 3D model of what the downtown core would look like once the high rise towers began to get built. City said they couldn’t create a model – so residents had students do something with LEGO. Former city planner and now Deputy City Manager Mary Lou Tanner looks over the model. She told the audience that there would be service changes in September and that her immediate focus is going to be on reliability – something the transit operation has not been able to do with the number of buses in the fleet and the number of operators on staff.
For the most part the audience had nothing but praise for the drivers – they always get a round of applause.
Some good news – Shoppers Drug Mart will become a part of the Presto card sales and refill operation.
The Downtown terminal will be open from 8-6 Monday to Friday and 9 to 6 on the weekends – and will no longer close at noon for lunch. There was a time when the then Director of Transit wanted to close the downtown terminals and have people hoof it over to city hall to buy bus tickets.
Connor told the audience that she has to first fix the foundation of the existing service and that she has a lot of work to do.
The audience learned that 80% of the transit traffic comes from half the routes
Burlington Director of Transit Sue Connor. Connor told the audience that she wants to dialogue with the community – words like that haven’t been heard a Transit Forums before. Connors came across as a nice lady who wants to make a difference.
Connor expects to take a report to city council sometime in June – at that point the audience that liked what she was saying Saturday will know if she can walk the talk,
 By Pepper Parr
April 23rd, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
There are more than 18,500 electric vehicles currently on the road in Ontario
More than 680,000 people in Ontario live in condominiums and more than 50 per cent of new homes being built in the province are condominiums.
With those two facts in hand it didn’t take the provincial government very long two put them together and come up with a program that would allow people to install charging station in the condominiums.
Some condominium boards do not permit he installation of an electric charging station.
 Province changed the rules – condo board cannot say no to electric charging stations. Starting May 1, 2018, new changes will be in effect to make it easier for condo residents to charge their electric vehicles at home as part of Ontario’s plan to fight climate change.
The new changes will:
• Reduce current requirements to make it easier for condo owners to get approval from their condo corporations to install an electric vehicle charging system in their condominium.
• Prevent condo boards from rejecting an owner’s application to install an electric vehicle charging system on condo property when the owner meets certain conditions.
These new rules to facilitate the installation of electric vehicle charging systems in condos will remove barriers to condo residents who own electric vehicles, or are thinking about purchasing one, by enabling them charge their vehicles where they live.
Ontario’s Electric Vehicle Charging Incentive Program has provided incentives worth approximately $2.5 million for the installation of almost 3,000 home charging stations since January 2013.
 Once the charging stations are installed – a way will have to be found to share the things fairly. The Climate Change Action Plan and carbon market form the backbone of Ontario’s strategy to cut greenhouse gas pollution to 15 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020, 37 per cent by 2030 and 80 per cent by 2050.The government will report on the plan’s implementation annually and review the plan at least every five years.
Tracy MacCharles, Minister of Government and Consumer Services pointed out that “One of the largest contributing factors that inhibits drivers from purchasing an electric vehicle is the fear of having nowhere to charge it. Condo owners have indicated they have faced challenges when trying to install charging systems on condo premises. Through these new laws, we will increase opportunities to install charging systems at condo properties in order to support residents who own or wish to purchase an electric vehicle.”
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Read more on reforming Ontario’s Condo Law
Subscribe to ONCONDO to receive updates about condo law changes
 By Pepper Parr
April 23rd, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
City council is going to consider community benefits, which are set out in Section 37 of the Planning Act, at a city Council meeting this evening.
Community benefits are an agreement a city signs with a developer who has been given more height and density for a project that asked for a zoning and or Official Plan amendment.
The agreement the city planning department arrived at with Carriage Gate, the developer of a 23-storey tower on Brant Street opposite city hall, has a number of people wondering why there isn’t all that much for the community in the agreement.
 The benefits the community is to get for the added height and density doesn’t seem balanced to some people. The tower was approved by council last November, on a 5-2 vote and gave the developer almost double the existing OP heights of 12 storeys (on the James/Brant corner of the property only) and 4-8 storeys on the balance of assembled lands.
There will be several motions from the ward Councillor who wants to modify staff’s proposed Section 37 Community Benefits.
Marianne Meed Ward will also raise what she calls the “larger issue” of how the city handles the use of Section 37 Community Benefits.
Meed Ward doesn’t think residents are getting a good deal and will be referring her colleagues to an alternative model she thinks the city should explore – Community Benefits Agreements.
According to Meed Ward, they are used in Toronto and elsewhere in Canada and the United States. She supports using CBAs instead of Section 37 because they give residents a seat at the table.
Meed Ward points out that Section 37 Community Benefits are only available if council grants height and density above the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw. Burlington residents want their council to respect the Official Plan and the Zoning bylaw.
Meed Ward argues that “ Section 37 Community Benefits represent only a fraction of the value uplift of the extra height and density granted to the developer. The calculation of benefits is based on the difference in value of the land at the current OP/Zoning permissions, and the amended OP/Zoning permissions. Then a factor of about 25% of that value is applied, to represent the city share. Community benefits are not based on the market value of the new units.”
 Marianne Meed Ward announcing her decision to run for the office of Mayor earlier this month. Third, said Meed Ward “Section 37 Community Benefits can be either cash or “in-kind” benefits, both of which are used for 421 Brant. What gets included in the in-kind benefits are often things that in my view should be a standard part of any application or be provided via the city’s budget — such as public art — rather than having to exceed our OP/Zoning to get these items.”
Fourth, Meed Ward says “the cost of Section 37 Community Benefits are often passed on to purchasers. This has happened in at least two developments I am aware of: the ADI mid-rise on Guelph Line, and the Molinaro development on Maple, where residents were required to pay $1 million to buy the Geo Thermal System. This pass-through of costs erodes affordability, something we’re told is a goal of high-rises in the first place.”
 Councillor Meed Ward wants public representation at the table when community benefits for increased height and density are being negotiated. Meed Ward’s fifth point is that “residents don’t have a seat at the table when negotiating Section 37 Community Benefits. These discussions take place behind closed doors between staff and the developer. The Ward councillor is consulted, but also doesn’t have a seat at the table, and their input can be ignored. Staff develop a proposal for benefits for council consideration; the public consultation kicks in when the report comes to Committee and Council for approval. Residents are forced into a reactive posture, rather than working together to get the best outcome. During the public discussion residents can ask for changes; council members can bring motions for changes.
Meed Ward believes that “granting extra height and density on any property fuels land speculation, which increases property values and tax assessment. That’s because properties become priced not at the current OP/Zoning permissions, but at the new height/density granted.
“This erodes the value uplift used to calculate Community Benefits, as land is priced assuming whatever was granted under an OP/Zoning amendment will be granted in future. So residents get a smaller amount of the pie.
She adds that “the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation takes land value into account when assessing properties for tax purposes, so residents and businesses face spiraling tax assessments. In the downtown, that is passed on to business owners, increasing their cost of doing business.
 The Berkeley under construction on Maria at John Street is close to being topped off. Seventh, Section 37 Community Benefits are voluntary — a developer does not have to agree with them — and can be renegotiated later via a council vote. We’ve already seen this occur with the Carriage Gate development at Caroline/John/Maria/Elizabeth (the same developer as for 421 Brant St). The original proposal included a community benefit of roughly 75% affordable units, calculated at Halton Region’s affordable housing rate.
This was later renegotiated via a council vote of 6-1 to roughly 25-30% affordable units. Meed Ward said she did not support the change.
“With all these drawbacks, Section 37 Community Benefits aren’t the community benefit they propose to be” said Meed Ward and adds that there is an alternative — private Community Benefits Agreements.
Meed Ward is Councillor for ward 2 and a candidate for the Office of Mayor in the October municipal election.
 By Ray Rivers
April 22, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Today Canada is in the midst of another constitutional crisis as British Columbia and Alberta slug it out over the twinning of the Trans Mountain pipeline and the delivery of bitumen from the Alberta oil sands to ports in B.C. The pipeline is one of three which were recently approved by the federal government given its constitutional authority over inter-provincial matters.
Today’s global oil prices mean that Alberta desperately needs the efficiency of pipeline transport for its export-destined bitumen to be competitive on world markets. The pipeline in question involves a twinning of an existing pipe being developed by Texas based oil industry giant Kinder Morgan. This should be straightforward, a done deal, and it would be, except for the politics.
 John Horgan, the NDP Premier of British Columbia and kept in office by a couple of Green Party members is battling out the twinning of an existing pipeline with the NDP Premier of Alberta. B.C. NDP premier Horgan feels that if he doesn’t at least try to stop the pipeline, his fragile coalition with the B.C. Greens, who vehemently oppose all ‘tar sands’ development, will collapse ending his brief spell as government. So he’s chosen to tilt at windmills, challenge the pipeline on shaky environmental safety grounds, where the province may claim some authority.
 Rachel Notley, NDP Premier of Alberta explaining that when her oil can go to BC their wine can come into Alberta There is a lot of politics on all sides. Rachel Notley’s NDP government is facing an election next year and she has to be seen defending Alberta with her life, which she is doing in spades. Her success here will be the key to her getting re-elected, despite the polls which confirm Albertan’s perennial preference for the Tories and their new leader, Jason Kenny.
And Kenny’s biggest ally is Kinder Morgan which is exploiting this B.C. opposition by halting construction and threatening to withdraw from the pipeline project entirely. There are a few protesters at the work sites, mainly environmental groups since most indigenous communities have signed on to the project. But halting construction has panicked Albertans who are understandably fed up with waiting and watching one pipeline proposal after another bite the dust.
 Justin Trudeau believes the federal government has the power and the right to approve the twinning of the pipeline but he doesn’t appear to be sure how he can get shovels into the ground. The Liberals have been unequivocal that the pipeline is within their exclusive jurisdiction and it will be build. But that will be problematic if Kinder Morgan pulls the plug. And besides, Albertans don’t trust the Liberals and learned to hate Justin’s father for doing to them what they think he should be doing to B.C.’s Horgan right now. Why doesn’t he just invoke the War Measures Act (Emergency Act) like his Dad did and tell Horgan….”just watch me”? Wasn’t getting involved in Alberta’s energy what Pierre is still scorned for today?
We have this unique situation of two NDP premiers from neighbouring and historically best friend provinces now at each other’s throats with threats to cancel electricity contracts and cut off wine and oil and bitumen.
The new federal NDP national leader is missing in action while his political kin are heading for the OK corral. Perhaps it’s just that the federal NDP is still pondering their Leap Manifesto which prescribed shutting down all tar sands eventually.
B.C.’s claim of provincial jurisdiction over federal laws has found a resonance with the Liberal leader in Quebec – also facing an election soon, and looking to shore up those errant separatists who might be persuaded to stick with the Liberals over the PQ. After all it wasn’t that long ago that a proposed Energy East project would have driven another pipeline through Quebec en route to the Maritimes.
Alberta has offered to put up some money to soothe Kinder Morgan, and the feds are thinking of buying in and maybe even buying Kinder out. It’s not clear that Kinder Morgan wants to sell, but everything has its price and perhaps the government might sweeten the deal with a threat of nationalizing in the public interest.
 The federal government says the Trans Mountain pipeline twinning will be done. Just when is the real issue. Federal investment into the project would add a whole new dimension to the potential fight between the two levels of government. And yes everyone knows that the feds would win, but when things go to court they don’t always leave the judges’ benches the way we might expect. Take the poor fellow who thought he could bring cheap Quebec beer into New Brunswick. We live in the same country – 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 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. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
Trans Mountain – Leap Manifesto – Alberta Threats –
Free The Beer Ruling –
By Pepper Parr
April 19th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
The Bfast 4th Annual Transit Forum takes place on Saturday at the Seniors Centre – get there early and you can take advantage of the free Continental Breakfast.
 Bfast has been advocating for better transit for years – some of the people in the organization know more about the history of transit in Burlington better than anyone currently employed at the transit department.
They are closer to being listened to than they have in the past seven years. It has been a hard slog – the appointment of a fully qualified and respected transit executive has begun to make a difference. Sue Connor came to Burlington from Brampton where she grew that operation into one of the xxx
She will be part of a panel discussion and open for questions – this is the time for the public to let her know what they want and need and where the problems are – and there are a lot of them
The Vital Signs report produced by the Burlington Foundation highlights where some of the transit problems exist.
 A partial snapshot of how people who live in Burlington get around or get to work Bfast have a deep understanding of the transit business – they have been delegating to council for years and for the most part have not been listened to – to some degree due to the poor management leadership at Burlington Transit.
There is much better leadership in place now; the recently appointed Director of Transit is a recognized and respected professional.
 Sue Connor, Director of Transit. The problem Sue Connor will have is getting the funds she needs to upgrade both the transit assets and money for additional staff – and then some money to do some experimenting. Connor is probably part of the Burlington Leadership Team (City Manager James Ridge call it the BLT – not a sandwich). The challenge for her is to get some of the money the city has marked for infrastructure updates – there is a special tax levy dedicated to road repairs.
 This is the picture Sue Conner got when she asked – How are things going? It wasn’t pretty. Burlington is some distance from ever creating a special tax levy to bring the transit service up to the level the the planners keep telling the public is going to be needed as a critical part of the Grow Bold initiative that is going to put something in the order of an additional 1000 people in new homes each year between now and 2031.
The planners keep talking about the need to get people out of their cars and maybe onto bicycles and transit. Connor is surely saying to her colleagues on the BLT – Sure – provide me with the funds I need to do just that.
There may be agreement between the transit people and the planners on what is needed – getting it through this council is another matter entirely.
Saturday is the public’s chance to make their voices and their opinions heard – but ya gotta be there to be heard.
Salt with Pepper are the musings, observations, thoughts, reflections and opinions of the publisher of the Burlington Gazette.
By Pepper Parr
April 19th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
The Alton Village Resident’s Association is holding a “No Voice No Representation” Rally at City Hall on Monday April 23rd at 6pm till 6:30pm.
 Will the “No Voice No Representation” Rally be real? Will people show up? They are inviting anyone who plans to run for a city council seat to attend and take part.
Ken White, who has said he will be filing nomination papers at city hall for the ward 6 seat, is involved with the resident association in creating an opportunity for “council candidates to speak their mind and air their concerns about Burlington. This is an all Wards invitation.”
By Staff
April 19th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Regional Council approved more than $2.3 million in funding for community programs through the Halton Region Community Investment Fund (HRCIF).
The HRCIF provides funding to non-profit social service and community health initiatives that support the health, safety and well-being of Halton residents. Funding is provided in one, two or three year grants, supporting programs that address mental health, prevent homelessness, support older adults, children and youth, and enhance food security.
By supporting our non-profit partners to improve access to services, Halton Region is able to have a direct and tangible impact on our residents’ quality of life. Halton Regional Chair Gary Carr. “A key priority of the Halton Region Strategic Action Plan, 2015-2018, is to increase the investment in the HRCIF, and Council is achieving this by increasing the funding from $702,691 in 2012 to more than $2.3 million today.”
Since 2012, the number of projects funded has more than doubled, from 25 to 55 currently.
The following programs will receive funding from the HRCIF in 2018:
• Canadian Mental Health Association Halton Region Branch to provide free walk-in counselling.
• CNIB to help blind and partially-sighted older adults adapt to their sight loss.
• Central West Specialized Developmental Services to provide workshops on healthy sexuality to vulnerable clients and to provide training for community service workers.
• Community Living Burlington to support the Autism Job Club to provide pre-employment skills development to clients with Autism Spectrum Disorder.
• Distress Centre Halton to expand a telephone check-in program to support people with mental health issues.
• Elizabeth Fry Society of Peel-Halton to provide case management to individuals participating in the Halton Drug Treatment Court.
 Food for Life refrigerated storage house – and a load of food ready to be delivered. • Food for Life to support food collection and distribution to community agencies and partners serving Halton residents that have difficulty affording food.
• Food4Kids Halton to provide food to children who have limited or no food during weekends.
• Halton Children’s Aid Society to provide service navigation support for youth aged 14-24 in Halton Hills.
• Halton Food Council to support community garden programming in assisted housing communities.
• Halton Multicultural Council to support vulnerable refugee clients with a settlement plan, information and wrap around support.
• Kerr Street Mission to help train and mentor volunteers to support people in distress, isolated seniors and at-risk youth.
• Kerr Street Mission to provide a walk-in cooler/freezer that will increase access to fresh food for clients and expand partnership programs.
• Licensed to Learn to support one-on-one, peer-led tutoring programs for low income and at-risk children.
• Milton Transitional Housing to increase availability of bridge accommodation and supportive one-to-one counseling to people in housing crisis.
• Mississauga Furniture Bank to purchase a delivery truck to provide furniture and household goods to low income and vulnerable clients in Halton.
• Oak Park Neighbourhood Centre to support a network of service providers working collaboratively to reduce barriers and improve quality of life for people with complex needs.
• Open Doors at St. Christopher’s – Feeding Halton to support the expansion of the Fresh Food Markets which provide local food at a discount to individuals with low incomes.
• Reach Out Centre for Kids (ROCK) to provide gender-diverse and trans-specific programs and peer support for children, youth and their families.
• Resiliency 4 Recovery – The Anglican Church of the Incarnation to expand recovery support programs for youth living with mental health, substance misuse challenges and other vulnerabilities. Funds will also support adults 30+ who are dealing with opioid misuse challenges.
• Schizophrenia Society of Ontario to train frontline staff at two local mental health organizations in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy related to psychosis.
• S.E.N.A.C.A. Seniors Day Program Halton Inc. to provide a therapeutic art program for physically and cognitively-impaired older adults.
• STRIDE (Supported Training and Rehabilitation in Diverse Environments) to develop and implement a workshop series to help people who have experienced an absence due to a mental health issue return to work.
• Support & Housing Halton to purchase a passenger van to transport clients to appointments, food banks, employment and other group activities.
• The Bridge from Prison to Community (Hamilton) to establish a reintegration program in Halton to work one-on-one with ex-offenders and their families.
By Staff
April 19th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
 Transformation of the Joseph Brant Museum site. While back hoes and cement truck work across the property transforming what was a single structure that we knew as the Joseph Brant Museum a company called Kubik is thinking through what there will be in the way of exhibits and interpretive features that will be installed in the large xxx foot space that will be underground.
 A view of the Fort Henry museum that Kubik did some work on. Kubik has been awarded the contract to provide the interpretive design, fabrication and installation at Joseph Brant Museum. The company has done work on the Fort York Visitor Centre, Philip J. Currie Dinosaur Museum, Wild Weather (Science North), Canadian Museum for Human Rights and Canadian Museum of Nature – Canada Goose Arctic Gallery.
 An illustration of some of the dresses in the collection at the Brant Museum. Kubik has presented a concept design that will feature central, charismatic, and dramatic exhibit hubs, timeline exhibits that will connect to central displays, over-sized interactives and immersive displays. The museum staff thinks they “ may even have a “fashion runway” in the costume gallery.
We can’t wait for that feature.
By Pepper Parr
April 19th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
This is going to hurt.
Frank McKeown has advised the Board of the Burlington Economic Development Corporation that he will be retiring from his role as Executive Director effective June 27, 2018.
 Frank McKeown – speaking at a public meeting. McKeown joined BEDC in 2014 and quickly began the redevelopment of the business model at BEDC to focus on supporting businesses to locate, start up and expand in Burlington. In 2017, BEDC worked with over 300 businesses to support them to relocate and grow in Burlington. BEDC has helped develop more than 4000 new jobs in Burlington over the last four years.
Among McKeown’s other accomplishments during his tenure:
• aligning BEDCs Economic Vision with the city’s Strategic Plan and the Official Plan
• launching , BEDC’s new innovation centre focused on helping companies start up and grow. In the first year of operations, TechPlace had over 3500 visitors, hosted over 50 events and developed a LaunchPad program that has attracted high growth startups like servicePath and 3terra to Burlington
 Frank McKeown, then the Mayors Chief of Staff explains a concept to Ward 5 Councillor Paul Sharman. McKeown was described as the 7th council member during the 2011 Strategic Plan sessions. • developing a strong focus on partnerships to deliver services to the business community which resulted in initiatives such as Mohawk College Career Crawl and Burlington Day at Mohawk
 • ensuring Burlington businesses benefit from the new Advanced Manufacturing Supercluster initiative announced by the Government of Canada.
It is going to be exceptionally difficult to find someone who can pick up where Frank left off. No reason mentioned why he chose to retire.
Anita Cassidy, currently the manager of economic development, will be appointed acting executive director and will be a candidate to fill the role of executive director when the board conducts a search process following the municipal election this November.
By Pepper Parr
April 19th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Earlier in the month the provincial government announced reductions in the cost of some GO transit services
What they are giving you with their right hand is going to be taken away with the left hand.
Premier Wynne announced last week that the cost of a trip on a GO train was going to be less.
 How you get from your house to the GO station is something you might want to re-think. Beginning in early 2019, the province is reducing the cost of GO Transit trips to just $3 for PRESTO users who are travelling under 10 kilometres anywhere on the GO network. Ten km wouild get you from the Aldershot station to the Burlington station – no deal there.
All GO Transit and Union-Pearson Express trips anywhere within the City of Toronto will be reduced to $3
What the Minister didn’t say was that at some point in the not too distant future the free parking at GO stations was going to come to an end.
Additional parking space is going to be created at the Aldershot GO station but that, apparently, is going to be the last parking spot created at a GO station in the Burlington area.
It costs MetroLinx a reported $40,000 for every parking space they provide (no breakout on just how that cost was arrived at – but let’s take them at their word for the moment) and they just can’t afford to create parking space for that price. And the land needed isn’t really available.
The solution: They are going to dissuade people from driving to the GO stations by making people pay for a parking spot. The howling on that one when the details are announced will be louder than the public reaction to that New Street Diet.
Not to worry – don’t expect an announcement on having to pay for parking before the provincial election.
After, tighten your grip on your wallet and think about other ways to get to the GO station.
Salt with Pepper are the musings, reflections, observations and opinions of the publisher of the Burlington Gazette.
 By Greg Woodruff
April 18th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Staff recently updated the language in the official plan regarding neighbourhood protection. The language as presented is not acceptable. And a proposed motion by Marianne Meed Ward does not go far enough.
Meed Ward said she is” Working on language for motion (meeting staff tomorrow) but intent will be to remove towns from low density neighborhoods. Apartments already out.
The language as proposed by staff would essentially green light semi-detached housing in all areas of Burlington. Townhouses and apartments could also be approved if they are “compatible with the surrounding area”, respectful of the “physical character” and provide an “amenity area.” This is the same subjective language that is a problem all over the city. People have to know what to expect and we have seen the planning definition of all these terms can be very far from what residents expect. This subjective language and the ability to convert houses into semi-detached needs removed from the “Residential – Low Density” definition.
 Part of an advertisement running on video screens in some Tim Horton’s locations in Burlington. Secondarily the definition of “Residential – Medium density” allows all sorts of unexpected and unwanted development. The language allowing for 4 story buildings with a rooftop deck in “Residential – Medium density” areas is also unacceptable. The difference between “Residential – Medium density” and “Residential – Low density” is largely invisible to residents. I doubt anyone knows what zone they are in and you have to check the map embedded in the 600-page official plan to have any idea.
We do not need to get into a discussion of the wisdom of these changes; We need to deliver the advertised protection to residents. The city is running ads on video screens in Tim Horton’s locations explaining how your neighbourhoods will be “protected.” What many people take that to mean is “protected from significant change.” Letting loose with semi-detached and 4 story buildings next door is a significant change.
If the city advertising said; “in neighbourhoods we will be limiting development in some areas to semi-detached and other areas to small apartment buildings” – then my complaint would be blunted. However the advertisements are very clear neighbourhoods will be “protected” and will “not change”.
We are setting up years if not decades of people that will have all sorts of legitimate anger directed to the city. We can leave the fate of the neighbourhoods to future OP battles. More than enough change is generated at the moment for people to absorb.
Direct staff to:
1) Remove the reference to semi-detached from 8.3.3(1).1
2) Remove 8.3.3(1).b entirely
3) Remove “non-ground-oriented dwellings”, “back-to-back townhouses” and “low-rise” from 8.3.4(1).a
4) Remove “non-ground-oriented dwellings” “back-to-back townhouses” and “low-rise” from 8.3.4(1).b
5) Modify 8.3.4(1).c to read “the maximum building height should be comparable to the average height of the highest points of the rooflines of existing residential buildings on the immediately adjoining properties sharing lot lines with the lands under application.“
We all need to get involved! Please like, share, tweet this post or e-mail a link to friends.
 Greg Woodruff is an Aldershot resident who ran for the office of Regional chair in 2014. There are those who believe Woodruff will seek public office during the 2018 municipal election.
By Staff
April 18th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Margo Shuttleworth, a candidate for the Ward 4 Halton District School Board trustee position in 2014 announced today that she will seek the seat currently held by Richelle Papin in the October municipal election.
Shuttleworth was a consistent observer of the HDSB Program Accommodation Review that resulted in the closure of two of Burlington’s seven high schools.
 Margo Shuttleworth She has been, actively involved in community engagement during her seven years as a Burlington resident: a member of the Burlington Charter Action Team, Healthy Kids Steering Committee member, Parental Involvement Committee member (PIC), Healthy and Safe Routes to School Co-ordinator, Parent Council Executive, Age-Friendly Community Chair Founding Board Member and Small Fry Skating Vice-President.
As a mother of children in the HDSB school system Shuttleworth describes herself as being committed to continuing to fight for the students of Ward 4.
You can reach Margo Shuttleworth at:
shuttleworth.m.a@gmail.com or call 289-838-4078
Related news story
|
|
