 By Staff
November 17th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Residents and community partners are invited to register for a workshop, Cultivating the Power & Possibility of Citizen Leadership: Creating Caring and Resilient Communities, Nov. 27, 2017 at LaSalle Banquet Centre.
Tamarack Institute and the City of Burlington are co-hosting a workshop with internationally recognized facilitator, Sylvia Cheuy, to explore Citizen Leadership: how it is nurtured, and the techniques and processes of working with citizens to become a positive force for change.
This workshop is for those who:
 Joanne Arnold delegating at city hall and being challenged on the validity of her petition. • Desire new ways to lead, engage and transform in your community
• Recognize the power and impact of citizen leadership in the development of resilient, caring neighbourhoods and communities
• Want to learn how municipalities and organizations can serve as catalysts for deepening community and fostering relationships of trust between neighbours
• Want to explore why multi-sector engagement is essential to positively impacting complex community issues such as: health and well-being; poverty reduction; overcoming loneliness and isolation; neighbourhood renewal; crime prevention; and, youth development
• Recognize why community engagement and collaboration are the foundation of inclusive leadership, including: NGOs; businesses; funders; and, national, provincial or local government
Cultivating the Power & Possibility of Citizen Leadership: Creating Caring & Resilient Communities
Date: Nov. 27, 2017
Time: 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. A light breakfast will be served at 8:30 a.m. Lunch is provided
Location: LaSalle Banquet Centre, 50 North Shore Boulevard, Burlington, ON
Cost: Single registration: $199. Two registrations: $179 per person. Three or more registrations: $149 per person
To learn more, or to register, visit https://events.tamarackcommunity.ca/resilient-communities.
 By Staff
November 17th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Tansley Woods Pool is closed for unexpected maintenance and is expected to re-open November 17th at 11:00am.
And we all know what “unexpected maintenance” is.
 Check out the schedule at Tansley before driving over.  Pool closed until 11:00 am
 By Staff
November 17th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Halton Regional police officers in Burlington seized several bicycles on November 9th 2017 as a result of an ongoing investigation.
The police want to identify the rightful owners of the bicycles.
 Anyone with information regarding this incident is asked to contact the 3 District, Criminal Investigations Bureau, through Angela Oliver at 905-825-4747 ext. 2374.
Angela will put the caller in contact with an on-duty investigator.
Tips can be forwarded to Crime Stoppers; “See Something, Hear Something, Say Something” at 1-800-222-8477 (TIPS), through the web at www.crimestoppers.ca or by texting “Tip201” with your message to 274637 (crimes).
Charges are pending at this time and an update will be released when more information is available.
 By Staff
November 17th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The Halton Learning Foundation hold what they call a Benefit Bash, an occasion they use to thank the people who support their work and to let loose just a little bit.
The Foundation is in place to work with school principal’s to meet those immediate need situations that far too many students face.
 Lesley Mansfield, the Executive Director of the Foundation reports that “This year’s Benefit Bash was one of the most successful to date, raising almost $89,000 in support of Halton District School Board students in need. Demand from schools to help vulnerable students is up more than 40% this year to date, so these funds are critical to ensure we can continue saying ‘yes’ to requests for support.”
 The Foundation provides financial support and is one of those early indicators of where there are real on the ground needs that often don’t get detected.
HLF provides emergency funds for students who require basics such as warm clothing, food, school transportation and school supplies, or who need help to be included in experiences such as field trips or school teams.
 By Pepper Parr
November 17th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Organizing your community and getting people out to meetings is the hard part. Every group that doesn’t like what the politicians or the bureaucrats are doing to them always has a core group – often very small and usually led by one person with energy and driven by the issue.
The Tyendaga Environment Coalition (TEC) doesn’t quite fit the mold. The issue is critical to the community – saving their homes from the disruption of a shale mine metres away from their homes that is under threat.
The residents feel they are not being served by a Mayor and the ward Councillor who have basically walked away from their constituents. Situations like this tend to make people angry and gets them out to meetings.
The issue is the decision the brick manufacturer made to begin mining shale in the third “cell” on property along King Road north of the North Service Road. The company has a license to do what they are doing – it was issued in 1972.
 The mining operation consists of three pieces of property: a west, central and eastern cell. The eastern cell is just metres away from homes that are in the million dollar plus range. The residents believe things have changed since that license was issued and they want the brick manufacturer to limit their mining operation to the west and central cells and leave the east cell as it is with a reported 9000 Carolinian forest trees on the property
 Then when you hold a meeting you get lucky and attract a musician with some star power and then during the meeting a resident takes to the microphone and tells how upset he is with what is being done to his lifestyle and commits $5000 on the spot.
The Thursday evening meeting was the third held by the TEC organizers – each time they held a meeting they had had to look for a bigger space. The movement has traction.
 It does help that the people in the West Haven community are pretty flush – many were able to write a cheques for $500 to create a war chest and hire some legal talent and get access to the experts who can help dig out the data.
It helps too when the provincial government sends observers – there just might be something going on.
Observers from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing were in the room.
Roger Goulet, one of the PERL – Protecting Escarpment Rural Land – driving forces, gave the audience of 200 a geography lesson that put the issue in a larger context and and pointed out just how inaccurate some of the information being given out by the brick manufacturer is.
The panel that answered some questions had Gord Miller, a former Ontario Environmental Commissioner speaking.
They had Dr Lynda Lukasik, Executive Director of Environment Hamilton talking about how to measure air quality and just how damaging the dust from the shale mine was to the lungs. When you have someone from Hamilton talking to you about air quality – you know you have someone who “knows whereof they speak”.
But the man who kept the focus was David Donnelly, an environmental lawyer who spoke with passionate that is supported by a deep knowledge base and just the right amount of chutzpah.
 David Donnelly. informed, entertained and told the audience that they can win their battle. Donnelly was part prosecutor, part evangelist nd always on point. He worked that crowd almost as well as John Diefenbaker did in his day.
Donnelly informed the audience that he had “served” the Ministry with an order to live up to the Environmental Bill of Rights, which sounded very impressive. What he did was email a document to the Ministry of the Environment and will follow that up with a hard copy that will be mailed.
Donnelly is no charlatan – he is just very good at entertaining and informing a crowd. He wanted the audience to:
Write a letter to the Mayor and the ward Councillor. He asked the audience to write the Mayor and tell him that they support the TEC position.
“Is this something this crowd and the community should do” asked Donnelly. All those in favour say Aye.
Aye said the audience in unison – then Donnelly asked for the Nays – you could have heard a pin drop. Anyone who might have had the courage to say Nay would have been stoned on the spot.
Donnelly asked the audience if the city should hold a design charette to decide what should be done with the property. He did the Aye and the Nay routine again
The TEC people held a draw – a nice piece of fund raising, and left a jar on the table with paper money in it – $20’s would give people the hint.
Donnelly explained to the audience the steps that were being taken – he was convincing.
 An audience of 200 listened intently as the progress to date on their attempt to stop a brick manufacturer from continuing to mine for shale. The crowd got to learn what a MZO order is – a Ministry Zoning order, a document that would compel a person or a corporation to stop what they were doing because the Minister had issued an order that the zoning on the property that allowed the shale mining to take place was on hold.
“All it takes is a stroke of the pen” said Donnelly
At times he sounded like one of those traveling evangelicals that aroused an audience and had them all at the altar.
It was fine theater and very effective community organizing. Donnelly and Goulet and Miller made a very critical point. Winning issues like this has been done before. Residents of Burlington had convinced a Joint Tribunal to refuse to issue a license to expand the Nelson Aggregate quarry in the Escarpment.
There is much more in the way of detail and background that the Gazette will report on.
What was clear was that the TEC was on a roll – it just might be do-able.
In the process of getting what the want the residents find that their Mayor and the ward Councillor are on what they feel is the wrong side of an issue.
One member of the TEC team said that their people had called the Mayor’s office to see if he was going to attend the meeting. A staffer is reported to have asked ‘Why would the Mayor attend an event at which he is going to b ambushed.’ The comment is probably not true but it did reflect the distrust that exists between the people and their Mayor who got elected partially on his environmental credentials.
Meridian, the brick manufacturer is hold a meeting to update the community on where they are with their plans. It will be a messy meeting – will the Mayor and the ward Councillor attend?
 By Staff
November 17, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
This one sale sets a new price level and marks the beginning of the end for the Beachway community that wanted to remain in their homes.
The owner of a property that is in excellent shape with two residences on the land has been sold.
 Sold for $1,302,000 The Regional Council approved the sale and a price of $1,302,000 that does not include incentives as outlined in the public Beachway Strategic Acquisition policy.
The sale will close December 22.
By Pepper Parr
November 17th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The buzz on the 7th floor of city hall is fierce. Word has it that many of the members of council (they all have offices on the 7th floor) are less than happy with Ward 2 Councillor Meed Ward taking to the air waves with her concerns about council’s 5-2 approving the 421 Brant 23 storey tower.
Meed Ward was on the air on Wednesday, the Mayor was on the air this morning.
 Meed Ward with the Mayor. Those two are clearly in full election mode.
The stakes are high.
Meed Ward will run for Mayor – if she loses she will leave public office. She did well as a broadcaster and newspaper columnist and might return to that sphere. She has always been attracted to the television camera lights.
The Mayor has served two terms and will want to leave the public sector having achieved something.
The city now has a Strategic Plan that the Mayor will take credit for – deservedly. He will take credit for the Grow Bold initiative that the city is working on.
If the re-development of the Waterfront Hotel site is anywhere near what the Plan B citizens group wants the Mayor will want to take credit for that – he can then leave office and be seen as a very successful Mayor.
Two people with a lot at risk.
 Mike Wallace in his campaign office the night of the last federal election when he lost his seat as a Member of Parliament. Mike Wallace is also out there wanting to return to public office (note that we say public office and not public service) and hoping to snatch the chain of office and return to city council.
His worship opined during his time on radio that the talk of people taking the city council decision to the OMB was much more than filing an objection. These things cost money and require access to people who can speak with some authority on the merits of the decision city council made.
It is going to be interesting to watch – and even more interesting to see what the citizens of Burlington do when it comes time to mark their ballots in October of 2018 – less than a year away.
By Pepper Parr
November 16th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
We are at a point in Burlington when a developer can have tonnes of abuse heaped upon them when they bring forward a project that many do not like.
Developers have to work within a set of rules and it is the job of the Planning department to ensure that the rules are adhered to.
 The planning advisor, Robert Glover, the planning consultant, Ed Fothergill and the building executive Mark Bales before a public meeting at which the citizens got their first look at the 421 Brant project that has been approved by city council. When all the studies have been completed, when the staff within the Planning department have had their internal discussions a report is written and sent to a city Council Standing committee where there is extensive debate – often lasting hours.
It is interesting to note that during the Standing Committee debate there was just the one public delegation.
One also has to note that at that particular Standing Committee, James Ridge, the city manager inserted himself into the debate with comments that are seldom heard from a city manager. Planning issues are the domain of the Director of Planning.
There is a segment of the Burlington population that does not like what it sees happening to the downtown core of the city.
Developers bring a project to a city Planning department; a report is prepared by people with designations that qualify them to make planning decisions.
That report gets debated by a city council, the people the citizens of the city elect. The current city council was elected in 2010 and every one of them re-elected in 2014. That is the democratic process we have and depend on.
 Nick Carnicelli, centre, takes photographs of a city planning department presentation of his 421 Brant Street development There is nothing corrupt about city council, they are not “in the pockets of the developers”.
With very few exceptions every home in this city was built by a developer that had to get a project through the planning process and then approved by the city council that was fairly elected.
Why we feel we have to beat up on as developer who followed all the rules is difficult to understand.
Nick Carnicelli, president of Carriage Gate, was the last delegator at the city council meeting last Monday. Here is what he had to say:
We are very proud of our project and the design excellence that it brings to the Downtown. A new building that enhances the streetscape and pedestrian experience while at the same time building on and enhancing important elements in the Downtown is very exciting.
We have assembled a team, including many pre-eminent planning, design and technical professionals. With their assistance, we have ensured that our project is comprehensively planned to address all relevant planning issues – it may well be the most comprehensively planned application that the City has ever received and builds on and enhances the most significant elements of the Downtown.
Our application has been reviewed within an emerging statutory framework for the Downtown based on the City’s Strategic Plan and will bring not only much needed housing to the Downtown BUT also new contemporary and usable retail and office space
In response to a rigorous review and scrutiny of the application by the City of Burlington, the Region of Halton and several other commenting agencies, many significant revisions have been made, with special attention being given to how people and land uses relate and work together at ground level and City-building initiatives:
The magnitude of the overall development has been reduced by approximately 25%. This has been accomplished by a number of changes related to not only the height of the building but also the size of the floor plate of the tower, the amount of the site that could be developed at-grade and revisions to the design of the building.
The entire building is pulled back from the property lines on all three sides – both the podium and the top to establish view corridors that do not exist today to frame City Hall, Civic Square and the Cenotaph. This has resulted in the buildable area of the site being reduced by 20% yet opportunities are provided for enhanced street-scaping, patios, tree planting, street furniture, paving materials and lighting to reinforce how special this site really is.
The lower podium adjacent to Brant and James has been cut back to provide view corridors – The original view corridor at the corner of Brant and James was 5 X 5 metres. It has been expanded to 16 X 16 square metres. This increases the size of the view corridor by over 500%.
The expanded view corridor in conjunction with wider sidewalks has resulted in a reduction in the amount of retail space – 17% not 30% as inadvertently noted by City staff. The benefits of the widened sidewalks, enhanced street-scaping, the view corridors and the construction of new contemporary retail space far outweighs the benefits of retaining a notional amount of outdated, obsolete and undesirable retail space.
The top floors of the building are pulled back even further and the height has been reduced by over 12.5 m. – 4 storeys
Tower floorplate has been reduced from 800 sq. m. to conform to the City’s Tall Building Guidelines and provide a slender tower.
The area of the proposed tower is well over 25% smaller than those that exist at adjacent buildings. In comparison, 478 Pearl Street built over 40 years ago is an 18 storey building with a floorplate of over 960 sq.
n. This is the equivalent of a 23 storey building built to current standards.
 Nick Carnicelli We are proposing to contribute to the easterly expansion Civic Square which has been presented as a significant City-building initiative.
Opportunities for public art are provided.
All of these changes recognize the importance of this site and its role within the evolving urban fabric of the Downtown. The City has never seen anything like this!
What Carnicelli didn’t say was that Carriage Gate began assembling property for this project ten years ago and that they at one point took a proposal to the Planning that met the 12 storey limit many people want.
It was a pretty plain looking building that used every possible foot of the property – not much in the way of a street-scape – but it met the rules.
The developer and the Planning department worked together to come up with the structure that met the new tall building guide lines that were new and the developer revised the proposal.
City council decided it was what the city needed and with two exceptions, the Mayor and the ward Councillor , voted for it.
Why are we beating up the developer?
Related news story:
Planning consultant explains the kind of growth Brant Street could see – become the spine of the city.
 By James Young
November 15th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
In November of 2016 Jim Young said to city council during a debate on the amount of time a citizen would have to delegate that: “Sometimes it may seem as if we delegates are the enemy of the process. That we somehow stand in the way of the great works and plans you all have in mind for the city.
“The democratic processes of our city demand that qualified, talented professionals like the city staffs and managers, we are fortunate to have in Burlington, apply themselves to a certain vision of the city.
“That they nurse that vision through the often tortuous process to council for approval and implementation, only to have someone like me, a citizens delegate, put a flea in council’s ear, a spoke in staff’s well-oiled wheel and force a review all of their efforts and the inevitable delay that brings.”
Jim comments on the most recent meeting of city council.
On Monday night Burlington City Council, ignoring the more than 1400 signatures on a petition and the 13 delegations opposed to it, voted to break their own rules governing downtown development and allow the development of a 23 story building in contravention of their own 12 Story bylaw. (Only one delegate, the developer, spoke in favour of the project.)
This was a sad display of council voting against the vast majority of citizen opinion, a rejection of local voices made even sadder by the fact that compromise may have been possible. Instead entrenched positions and a degree of “Not in My Wardism” were allowed to carry the day.
 Jim Young delegating before city council. We all know and understand that council cannot be swayed by every nuance of public opinion, we elect them to lead and expect them to do so, but in this instance the opposition was so overwhelming and the possibility of compromise so obvious that the wisdom of the five Councillors who voted for the amendment, in a the year before an election, must be seriously questioned.
Why, for instance, could the developer not have settled on 15 or 17 floors, there would still be ample profit in this, it would still meet intensification targets and be much less intrusive on the character of the area?
Why was there no offsetting land allocation for park or green space? Why does council not hold the developer responsible for affordability units in the development? (Only vague and non-binding considerations on affordability are embodied in the proposal)
While sensible intensification and increased density are supported by all of council, city staff and the majority of citizen opinion, last night’s decision to allow a development so far removed from the official plan, existing bylaws and any sense of building proportion, may well prove to be a tipping point in the eventual destruction of Brant street as we know it. Other developers have already snapped up adjoining properties and now have the green light on non-complying developments.
Ironically, the idea of downtown walk-ability and community vibrancy that the downtown plan seeks are the very things that will be destroyed by developments like this as the floodgates open and they become the new downtown.
On Monday night, there was palpable feeling that there may have been a settling of old scores between some members of council and ward 2’s Councillor Meed Ward. It would be a sad day indeed if decisions of this importance are based on past enmities. Hopefully, electors will such behaviour accountable in next year’s civic election.
 Jim Young as he thinks through a point he is making at a transit meeting. On the subject of elections, if I may be so bold as to offer Councillor Dennison some advice: Questioning the integrity of a well-intended citizen petition is just not smart politics. Even if a few of the more than 1400 signatures were not fully vetted, disparaging the integrity of the signatories as well as insulting a lot of citizens, ward constituents and voters, is hardly the way to encourage civic engagement by well-meaning citizens. If a few signatures were disqualified would 1399 have swayed you?
Mayor Goldring had to remind the gallery of the rules of decorum at the groans which accompanied one Councillor’s suggestion that this would not set a precedent for future downtown development, (by Wednesday, one more developer had requested approval to add two more stories to a proposed building at Locust and Elgin Streets) or that council’s rejection of citizen input is a template for future engagement.
While he insisted, we will listen in future and staff will listen in future. The groans from the gallery suggested: “Then why are you not listening now?”
Burlington City Council loves to parade their national and international honours and laurels for civic engagement. They now have to learn that when you talk the self-congratulatory talk you must also walk that walk!
When you ask citizens to come together, ask for their input, then, when they do, you overwhelmingly reject them, you can no longer claim that high ground on civic engagement.
You either listen to your voters and compromise or they will assume their voices are only heard at election time with all the future electoral consequences that entails.
 By Pepper Parr
November 15, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The decision has been made.
 The condominium that is to be built on the corner of Brant and James Street is to rise up to 23 storeys.
How many parking spaces, the number of elevators, how many, if any, affordable units – all that will get worked out in the months and weeks ahead.
We now know that the land assembly of the block to the south is all but complete – just the jewellery store to be acquired.
What we heard however is that the block to the south – the one that was once the Elizabeth Interiors operation – is going to be limited to 17 stories – a limit that is set out in the Downtown Core Mobility Hub that isn’t cast in stone yet.
That could be both a mistake and a missed opportunity.
We have yet to hear much in the way of negative comment on city hall as a structure. It gets referred to as “iconic” and the city planner likes the building.
Given that we are going to have high rise buildings can we not make the best of it. If the city hall is really “iconic” (I’ve yet to be convinced) then feature it.
While Burlingtonians hate Toronto being made a reference point – bear with me.
When you drive up University Avenue from Front Street and approach Adelaide there are two towers (Toronto type towers) on either side of the street. Both are Sun Life Assurance buildings meant to frame University as you go north.
 Set aside that the two buildings on either side of University Avenue in Toronto loom over the street – it’s Toronto. Note the way they frame the street. The photograph we have dropped in isn’t all that good but it makes the point. It is possible to have buildings in place that serve as a frame to what lies beyond.
Now come back to Burlington and place yourself on James Street a block or two along the street and look towards city hall.
 James Street looking west to Brant Street. The current Carriage Gate building, on the right in the photograph, which is going to be turned into a 23 story tower. That is a done deal.
The property on the left, now the vacated Elizabeth Interiors store will fall within the rules that are going to govern the development limits for the Downtown Mobility Hub.
There is an opportunity here.
Someone with initiative and a desire to see something significant come out of the decision that has been made could pick up an idea like this and make a difference.
Why not work with Carriage Gate and Revenue Properties (the people who are assembling the block south of Brant and James) and build a better city.
Look for a design that is as close as possible to identical in design and have them rise to the same height. Same set back from the side walk; same trees, same patio set up, same sidewalk furniture.
The public art set outside each building would complement each other.
That is something that people could be proud of and perhaps change the way downtowners look upon their city. For those who need the quaint and historical the Queen’s Head and the old Russel Hotel will still be there.
Can the 421 project be more than just the first high rise tower in the downtown core?
Look at the Sun life building on University.
All this assumes that those opposed to the Carriage Gate building don’t take their beef to the OMB.
By Pepper Parr
November 15, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Well – we now know that there are going to be high rise – 23 floors plus – in the downtown core. That got decided at a defining city council meeting on Monday evening.
Ten years from now the city will look a lot different.
There is one development issue that could be even more critical to the development of the city, the look and feel of the downtown core.
 The Waterfront Hotel as we know it today is on the left – the red patch of excavation on the right is where the Bridgewater is being built. The city planners are currently working their way through a study of the re-development of the Waterfront Hotel property.
When the owner of the Waterfront hotel, Darko Vranich let the city know that he wanted to increase the density and add some height to the land there was an agreement struck that the city would hire people to come up with some design ideas. Three teams of designer/thinkers were to be assembled; two would work with the city – a third would work with the developer. And the developer would pay for all three studies.
A group of citizens have decided they are going to insert themselves into the process in a significant way. Several of the group live in the Lakeshore condos and they don’t want to see their part of the city go to the dogs.
No petitions from these people. They are hard core and they have done their homework and are putting ideas on the table.
The starting point.
 The site that is being re-developed is shown in dark blue – with a rendering of what the Bridgewater development will look like relative to the Waterfront Hotel. The city has taken the public through an intensive community engagement process – all the meetings took place in the downtown area – what the people in Headon, the Orchard, Palmer and Alton think about what happens to the Waterfront Hotel property isn’t being recorded.
After a number of sessions where ideas were set out as sketched and then produced as rough models and made public.
The process started with three possible designs put forward: Two came from the city planning department and a third from the developer.
The Plan B people were not impressed – they came out with an idea of their own while the city produced what they called an “emerging concept”.
Let’s see what these all look like.
The early design concepts:
 This is the first concept that came out of the Planning department. It shifts the focal point of the site from Brant Street to John Street.
 This is the second concept that came out of the Planning department. It keeps Brant Street as the main road into the property but moves the towers to the eastern side of the property. Twenty and 30 floors was a surprise.
 This is the design that was submitted by the property owner. It uses John Street as the entrance to the eastern end of Spencer Smith Park. The massing is to the east and west of the property. The suggestion that 40 storeys was acceptable has made many people gulp. What the Planning department made of the three concepts.
 The Planning department took the three concepts and what they liked from all the designs that came out of the community workshops and have given the public what is being called Planning Department’s Emerging Preferred Concept. The concept doesn’t suggest any building heights. The concept does make both Brant and John Street entrances. to the Park. Not so fast say the Plan B people – more public space please and lower your sights on the height while you are at it.
 The Plan B people saw it all quite a bit differently. They wanted far more space at the foot of Brant street and have the Pier show cased . All this goes to a city meeting on November 28th.
There is an opportunity to do something spectacular – but it is going to take a city council that decides not to make the mistake made in 1995 when what is now the Bridgewater development decision was made.
What is interesting is the way many of the Waterfront Hotel re-development designs snuggle up to what is going to be the Marriott Hotel and the seven story condo at the foot of Elizabeth Street.
There are a lot of people who want to keep the quiet quaint feel of the downtown core. There isn’t going to be anything quaint about the waterfront five to six years from now. It could end up being very smart looking, swift, hip and cool. But getting to that point will be a painful process.
Related new stories:
Part 1 of a multi part series.
 By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Ward 3 Councillor John Taylor was Ok with a 23 storey tower opposite city hall. His focus was on saving the waterfront view.
He called it the view the jewel of the city.
“The lake is the prize” he said, “we have to protect that view.”
 What a view. Councillor Taylor, along with the other members of Council except Meed Ward, voted to sell it to private interests. Taylor needs to be reminded of the position he took in 2015 when he voted to sell lakeside land to property owners whose homes abutted land the city owned.
There were several small parcels of land owned by the city and the provincial government.
A staff report on what was to be done with property that was referred to as “windows to the lake”.
The Staff report set out three choices: Do nothing, lease the land or sell it.
 The graphic tells the story. The city owned the land inside the red boundary line. Three property owners had land that abutted the city property. The city sold the land they owned for peanuts. Taylor voted for the sale of that “prize”. Residents whose property abutted the land saw an opportunity and moved quickly to make an offer. The succeeded in convincing the city to sell them the land and today those property owners have a superb view over the lake and no longer have to put up with the public walking past the edge of their property.
 Councillor Taylor – protecting those waterfront views. During that debate Councillor Taylor grumbled about creating new parkland saying that there was a public park less than a block away. And indeed there was a public park – Port Nelson Park – a small patch of land that has a very good view of the lake.
Taylor said at the time that the public didn’t need anymore parkland in that part of the city.
Taylor was quite right – the “lake is the prize” – then why did he go along with selling lakefront property to private interests in 2015?
We will never know – and that magnificent stretch of land will never be in the hands of the public again.
Indeed the lake is the prize.
 By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
At the start of each city council meeting the Mayor reads out a notice explaining to people what to do in the event of an emergency.
On occasion he explains to the public sitting in the gallery that they are not to engage in any form of demonstration.
At one point in the Monday evening meeting at which a particularly devise issue was being debated he told the audience there was to be no booing, no hissing and no laughing.
At the beginning of the Council meeting the Mayor took a few minutes to present proclamations to people.
 The Mayor reading out and then presenting a proclamation to a representative from Diabetes Canada. Applause followed. As he handed over the proclamation to the representative from Diabetes Canada and then moved beside the woman for the photo ops that he so thoroughly enjoys the audience broke into applause.
Not a word from the Mayor on what is allowed and what is allowed and not allowed to do in the Council chamber.
The hypocrisy, the audacity – the plain cheek of the man. He diminishes the office he holds and comes across as a bit of a fool.
By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Has there ever been a citizen petition that Councillor Jack Dennison thought had some merit?
He certainly didn’t have much time for the petition Joanne Arnold presented to city council last night when the decision to approve the bylaw necessary to allow the developer to proceed with the next step as being debated.
 Ward 4 Councillor Jack Dennison – not a fan of citizen petitions. We have yet to see Councillor Dennison ever accept a petition at face value. He consistently challenges the contents of a petition – last night he asked Ms Arnold if she could verify the 144 names that were on the petition – she could not.
“Were they all from Burlington” Dennison asked. Ms Arnold said that some of the people who responded may have been out of the country and responded from wherever they were.
Dennison managed to discredit what the delegator believed was a demonstration of commitment.
He was having none of it.
So much for encouraging people to express their views. It will be sometime before Joanne Arnold chooses to appear before city council
By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
She did what she always does – hammers away at the point she wants to make.
If there is going to be any grass near the now approved 23 storey condominium the city is going to have to lay sod in the Civic Square. During the lengthy city council meeting Monday evening Ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward asked each of the delegations what they thought was an appropriate height for the condominium tower that has been proposed for the north east corner of Brant and John Streets – across the street from city hall.
Meed Ward knew what the answers were going to be – there wasn’t a single delegation that was for the 23 storeys that were recommended by the Planning department. The developer had asked for 27 storeys.
 Councillor Sharman with his back to the camera debates with Councillor Meed Ward during Strategy Planning sessions. She doesn’t back away from a difference of opinion. Neither does he. Meed Ward has always been opposed to height in the downtown core. She has a following and represents the views and feelings for the city that many want to retain.
The Mayor sort of shares her view – he just isn’t as good as she is at making her point and sticking to it.
Meed Ward is the only member of Council who consistently asks questions of delegations and staff.
She’s not shy about saying she doesn’t understand something. She sees her role as that of getting the answers she needs and doing the same for her constituents.
Monday evening was a disappointing night for Marianne Meed Ward on several levels – she didn’t make as much as a dent in the position four of the members of council had taken.
She is never going to get a change of mind or a change of heart from Councillors Craven or Sharman.
 Councillors Meed Ward and Lancaster pose with five members of the Friends of Freeman Station. She will get a smidgen of acknowledgement from Dennison. She and Councillor Lancaster have never been close – except for the exceptional work the two of them did in saving the Freeman station.
Meed Ward sits beside Councillor Taylor – if anyone was going to side with her philosophically it would have been Taylor – he didn’t budge.
So – what does Meed Ward take away from the decision? She certainly keeps her followers happy – are there enough of them to elect her as Mayor in the October 2018 election?
If Burlington is going to elect Meed Ward as Mayor they want to ensure that they elect people who share some of her views – or this city will face four years of political grid lock.
By Staff
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Sounds like rubbing the salt into the wound.
The Board of Education sent out a media release asking Lester B. Pearson high parents if they might be interested in serving on a sub-committee to prepare for the school’s closing in June 2018.
They have until December 1st to send in an Expression of Interest Submission form.
On the same day a group of parents from the school were told by the Board that Patrick Brown, Leader of the Ontario Opposition could not tour the schools.
 Rory Nisan and George Ward trading contact information – both have been active in efforts to keep their school open. In their media release the Board said the Lester B. Pearson High School’s Integration Committee is seeking subcommittee members and volunteers to form two subcommittees in preparation of the school’s closing in June 2018. Members of the subcommittees can be students, staff, parents, alumni or community members.
The first subcommittee is being created to assist in the identification, gathering and cataloguing of Lester B. Pearson High School artifacts and the development of a plan to honour memorabilia. Members of the second subcommittee will assist in the planning of closing ceremonies and community activities.
 Where will the school’s memorabilia go? Tasks of subcommittee members and volunteers include, but are not limited to:
• Creating an inventory of artifacts and memorabilia items (e.g. banners, graduate composites, awards, etc.)
• Designing and dedicating space to display memorabilia in the community
• Liaising with the Burlington Historical Society and Burlington museums
• Development and planning of closing ceremonies and activities
• Developing a communication strategy and timelines
“Honouring artifacts and memorabilia from Lester B. Pearson High School and celebrating the history of the school is a priority for the Integration Committee, as well as current and former students and staff,” says Terri Blackwell, Superintendent of Education for the Halton District School Board.
If you are interested in this opportunity, as a subcommittee member or volunteer, please complete the Expression of Interest form The form will be available until Friday, December 1, 2017. The subcommittees will be formed prior to the first meeting on December 14, 2017.
 Bateman and Pearson high school parents are hoping that Margaret Wilson, the Facilitator doing an Administrative Review of the Board decision to close the schools will recommend that the PAR process be done a second time. Parents at the two high schools scheduled to close are hanging their hopes for a change in the decision on the Administrative Review of the process the Board used to close the school.
It is a stretch – but Administrative Reviews have in the past sent a decision back to a school board and required them to do the Program Accommodation Review a second time.
The problem with this “hope” is that it all goes back to the elected trustees that made the decision to close the schools.
That’s the level at which a change has to be made.
By Staff
November 14, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The Halton District School Board has denied a request to have Progressive Conservative Education Critic and party leader MPP Patrick Brown visit two Burlington High Schools.
Representatives from Robert Bateman and Lester B. Pearson Parent Councils submitted requests to have Brown visit their schools as part of their efforts to highlight the critical roles their schools play in the community.
The denial came from HDSB representative Marnie Denton who told the groups that “there aren’t to be school tours by politicians at this time.” When asked whether this was a Board staff or Trustee decision, Ms Denton provided a three word response “Board staff decision”. No other reasons for the denial of the request were provided despite several requests.
 Tony Brecknock Tony Brecknock, a member of the Pearson Parent Council said “denying a visit to the school – any visit by a very important member of our political system and society – is failing both the students of Pearson and Bateman and the community as a whole.”
Brecknock adds that the Board seems “afraid of the exposure but this is unacceptable in a transparent, democratic society.”
Both Robert Bateman High School and Pearson High School are slated for closure following the HDSB’s Program Accommodation Review (PAR) conducted earlier this year. Committees working to save both schools were successful in their requests to the Ministry of Education for Administrative Reviews – one of the only mechanisms available for communities to fight school closures. Last month, Margaret Wilson was appointed Facilitator for the Reviews currently underway.
 Bateman parents and students demonstrating to keep their school open. Deb Wakem who is a Bateman parent and a member of that Parent Council says that “if the school board is to learn from their mistakes and improve a process which has massive ramifications on the community and our children we need to work together – politicians, the school board, community – to ensure we have the best process in place.
Wakem also suggests that “by not allowing Patrick Brown to visit these amazing schools, the HDSB is merely hiding from responsibility, accountability and transparency.”
 Ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward with Ontario Leader of the Opposition Patrick Brown at a Queen’s Park rally. Patrick Brown, the leader of the provincial PC party has been an outspoken critic of the Liberal government’s record of school closures in Ontario and called for a moratorium on such closures in early 2017 well ahead of the government’s current moratorium. As part of the PC’s Recommended Policy Resolutions currently being considered by their members, the party is recommending “an immediate moratorium on school closures and an immediate review of any schools that are slated to close.”
By Staff
November 14, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
They are bringing in the big guns.
 Sarah Harmer, will speak at the Tyandaga Environmental Coalition public meeting. Juno award winning singer, songwriter and conservation activist, Sarah Harmer, will speak at the Tyandaga Environmental Coalition public meeting on November 16, 2017 in Burlington, Ontario.
Harmer will join a group of environmental experts and advocates to raise public awareness of the scheduled deforestation of northwest Burlington by Meridian Brick.
An estimated 9,000 trees are scheduled to be clear cut for an urban quarry that mines shale for brick production. The threatened area contains about 35 acres prime forest, habitat to a number of at-risk and endangered species, including an endangered Jefferson dependant unisexual salamander that was discovered in the spring.
Meridian Brick is expanding its quarry under an aggregate license that was issued in 1972. The proposed quarry expansion would now come as close as 35m to homes in the Tyandaga neighborhood, threatening the health and well-being of the community.
 PERL took years and a lot of local fund raising to get to the point where a Joint Tribunal ruled that the application for a quarry expansion was to be denied because of the endangered species on the property. The upper orange outline is the existing quarry – the lower outline is where the expansion was to take place. Sarah Harmer co-founder of the conservation organization PERL (Protect Escarpment Rural Land) that helped stop an 82-hectare aggregate quarry on the Niagara Escarpment at Mt. Nemo north of Burlington. She continues to raise awareness of the environmental impact of aggregate mining.
Harmer will join a list of environmental experts that includes Gord Miller, former Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, David Donnelly, environmental lawyer and former Director of the Canadian Environmental Defense, Dr. Lynda Lukasik, environmental advocate for sustainable community development and the Executive Director at Environment Hamilton, and Roger Goulet, Executive Director for PERL.
The Tyandaga Environmental Coalition (TEC) is a group of concerned citizens fighting to save Burlington’s greenspace and protect the health and wellbeing of the city’s residents. Once a small group of like-minded-neighbors that came together when quarry expansion was announced, the environmental coalition now has nearly 3,000 supporters that are helping to petition the Honourable Kathryn McGarry (Ontario Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry) and the Honourable Chris Ballard (Ontario Minister of the Environment and Climate Change).
 The west and centre quarries are nearing the end of life and the company wants to now quarry in the eatern section that is metres away from private homes. TEC is requesting that the proposed urban quarry extension have an immediate independent evaluation of the impact on the community based on the current demography and updated environmental and health standards. Also needed are further studies of how clear cutting an estimated 35 acres of forested habitat will affect endangered species. These studies need to be viewed from the perspective of current environmental law.
The meeting will be held on November16, 2017, 7:00 pm at the Crossroads Centre located at 1295 North Service Road, Burlington
By Staff
November 13th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Elgin Street between Locust Street and Blathwayte Lane will be closed on November 14 and 15, 2017 from 7:00 am to 7:00 p.m. for excavation work.
Signs and barricades will be up.
The Saxony development has had excavation problems related to water that wasn’t originally evident.
 Excavation work at the Saxony development site.
By Pepper Parr
November 13, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Petitions!
Do they make a difference?
 The 421 Brant development, approved by a city council Standing Committee, goes before city council for approval this evening. Are they an accurate barometer of what the public in general is thinking or are they an opportunity for people who are opposed to something to show their opposition?
Do the politicians pay attention to petitions?
In many cases a petition is the only voice people have when they want to oppose something their government.
The current petition asking the city to stick to the current zoning for the northeast corner of Brant and James streets was put forward by Joanne and Kevin Arnold who said they created the petition to change something they cared about. 1384 people have added their name so far.
The people who are opposed to the New Street Road Diet have collected 2641 signatures as of January – that is the most recent number – appear to have signatures from the ward the bike lanes are in.
UPDATE: As of Nov 13th there are 3262 signatures, plus 500 signatures on a hard copy of the petition.
A number of years ago Councillor Marianne Meed Ward created a petition to oppose the sale of lake front property the city owned between Market and St. Paul Street – she got more than 2000 names on that petition. The property was still sold.
Those opposed to the now recommended development at Brant and James have the right to delegate before city council.
The city is faced with a serious problem – they are required to add significantly to the population of the city and there isn’t very much land on which to build new homes. They can’t build out – so they are going to build up. And they chose to recommend to council that a project that would have 23 storeys be approved. The 5-2 vote was pretty emphatic.
Are those opposed to the development – they say they are not opposed to height they just don’t want it built on property so close to the waterfront – wanting a Burlington that cannot be sustained?
 Gary Scobie delegating before city council – he was one of the few that had anything to say about the development at a city Standing Committee early in November. There were not very many public delegations speaking against the development when it was at the Standing Committee stage. The city manager spoke more forcefully for the project than any city manager has spoken in this reporter’s memory.
City councils are elected – put in office to serve the people. If the public is really, really, really opposed to this project have several hundred of the 1380 who signed the petition get off their couches and head for city hall and use their five minutes to demand that city council respect their wishes.
Something like THAT would have an impact.
The Gazette has published the delegation Tom Muir, an Aldershot resident will make to city Council this evening. A review of the comments about his delegation is worth a read – it gives a sense as to how the public feels about this issue.
An Open Letter from former Mayor Mary Munro to the current Mayor is also a solid insight on how this development proposal has been managed.
Salt with Pepper is an opinion column written by the publisher and sole share holder of the Burlington Gazette.
|
|
