Government All « Burlington Gazette - Local News, Politics, Community

Is Canada finding it hard to stomach some of the Commonwealth members?

October 10^th, 2013

By Ray Rivers

BURLINGTON, ON. One thing for sure about civil war is that it is never that – civil. Whether we look back to the US civil war, Northern Ireland, Russia’s Chechnya, Rwanda, Syria or Sri Lanka, these conflicts were/are bloody and deadly. There is something deeply personal about these family feud conflicts which engenders a certain zeal and passion, bringing out the worst in human-kind, and making human rights the first and last casualties. So even after the fighting is over, the war continues, as the victor seeks to extinguish the lingering flames of revolution.

Tamil Tiger – the political disruption has been going on for a long, long time. Canada now has the largest number of Tamil’s outside Sri Lanka.

Our prime minster is right to be outraged with the magnitude of what is still going on in Sri Lanka. But the conflict in that country is complicated, as is always the case. Sri Lanka is a bilingual nation, not unlike Canada, and the Tamil quest for independence should make us all appreciate how close we came back in 1970, when our own terrorist Tamil Tigers, the FLQ, threatened the unity of this nation. Recall that Trudeau, too, had been criticized for violating human rights by introducing the ‘War Measures Act’ which effectively disposed of the FLQ. Like Sri Lanka, our issues of national unity also have their origins in the ashes of a well-meaning British colonial rule.

Canada, as a modern developed nation, has a dominant position in the British Commonwealth and is also a significant source of funds for the organization. So what we do and what we say should matter. And if it doesn’t, perhaps we are not saying it effectively. Leadership is about getting others to follow you, and so far Mr. Harper is alone in boycotting the next Commonwealth meeting in Sri Lanka. So what is behind his strategy?

If we take Harper’s statement at his word, that this is all about human rights, then why was he just in Malaysia, concluding a big deal with those human rights violators. In fact, if he were really that pious about human rights he might want to avoid the US, which is still operating its former torture facility in Cuba. And, perhaps he needs to reflect on his own ‘glass house’ before casting stones, since it is likely the UN will be weighing in on human rights offenses alleged by our own aboriginal population.

But will it make a difference? Will Sri Lanka stop its human rights violations if the PM boycotts the meeting? Trudeau and Mulroney played a key role in eliminating Apartheid in South Africa by engaging the rest of the membership, showing leadership and being there. Can we really improve human rights in Sri Lanka by ‘taking our ball and staying home’?

One of the purposes of the Commonwealth is to deal with issues like this between and within member nations. There are committees, such as the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group, where joint action, as was the case of South Africa, could be initiated. Options include sanctions and expulsion of the delinquent nation form the Commonwealth. If anything, the PM’s presence, not his absence, is what is most needed.

The Commonwealth of Nations: Has Prime Minister Harper given up on this lot?

It may be poor advice from the bureaucrats at the foreign affairs office which is driving the PM in this confusing and ill-conceived direction. Or it might be something else – such as political opportunism. The Tamil-Canadian population has grown to over a quarter of a million since the early 1980’s, making Canada home to the largest number of Tamil Diaspora. The majority of this immigration settled in and around Toronto, an area the federal Conservatives would love to own after the next election. And this PM is not afraid to use Canada’s international policy to try to attract voters to his party, as we have seen by his unquestioning support of Israel’s war actions since he first came to office.

If Harper is saying he’d rather stay home than be at the table with a single errant Commonwealth member, then why not just quit the British Commonwealth all together? There will always be errant members. But Stephen Harper is unlikely to do that, the staunch monarchist that he is. After all he renamed our military ‘Royal’, replaced the maple leaf with old British motifs, stuck the Queen’s picture in all our foreign embassies, and is loath to remove the oath to the Queen. So perhaps the Commonwealth is just not good enough for our revisionist PM. Perhaps he’d prefer to bring back the good old British Empire.

Ray Rivers, born in Ontario earned an economics degree at the University of Western Ontario and a Master’s degree in economics at the University of Ottawa. His 25 year stint with the federal government included time with Environment, Fisheries and Oceans, Agriculture and the Post office. Rivers is active in his community; has run for municipal and provincial office and held executive positions with Liberal Party riding associations. He developed the current policy process for the Ontario Liberal Party.

How city council managed to vote to sell waterfront lands and what some people want to do about that.

Part 2 of a two part article on the selling of waterfront property

Part 1

Salt with Pepper – Opinion

October 8, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. The public now has a fuller picture of what is at risk in the possible sale of land it owns on the lake’s edge between Market and St. Paul Streets, south of Lakeshore Road, where there is a patch of road that was the old Water Street road allowance. Water Street was once the city’s most southerly road.

Council was working from a Staff Report that came as the result of a Staff Direction Ward 1 Councillor Meed Ward asked for in 2012. That direction was to: Direct the Manager of Realty Services to report back to the Budget and Corporate Services Committee regarding the portion of Water Street located between St. Paul Street and Market Street providing the background and history and options available to the city. Staff came back with three options

Option #1: Create a city parkette: connecting the St. Paul Street and Market Street road allowances.

Option # 2: Develop Windows-on-the-Lake at St. Paul and Market streets and retain ownership with an exclusive lease to the abutting landowners until required for public use.

Option # 3: Develop Windows-on-the-Lake at the foot of Market and St. Paul streets and dispose (sell) of the Water Street parcel.

The graphic sets out the land that is under discussion by city Council. The piece in the middle is what residents abutting this land want to buy from the city. The pieces on the left and the right are road allowances the city also owns.

Option #1 would have the city purchasing Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) portions of the waterfront between the St. Paul’s and Market Street road allowances and using that land along with the old Water Street road allowance to create a new waterfront parkette. The residents who paid for the sea wall that was built some twenty years ago were to be paid for what they spent.

Option # 2 would be to preserve land for future public use by purchasing the MNR land and retaining ownership of the land the city already owns then entering into lease agreements with the owners that abut that land. The two pieces of land on the east and west sides would be turned into Windows-on-the-Lake.

Option #3 would dispose (sell) of the Water Street land and still develop the Windows-on-the-Lake on the East and West sides of the site where the city owns the road allowance.

As is the practice in Burlington, the public can delegate and give council their views on the report being considered.

Bob Wingfield, a long time Burlington resident

There were four delegations: Bob Wingfield speaking for Burlington Waterfront, a community group that works out of the offices of ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward, James Ziegler, a 24 year St. Paul Street resident, Janice Connell and her husband Mike Swartz who live on Lakeshore with property looking out over the lake and Byron Kaczmarek who lives several doors east of Nelson park and has no financial interest in what happens to the land being discussed. He did have very strong views on the kind of behavior at Nelson Park.

Bob Wingfield brought that solid conservative typically Burlington approach to the issue and suggested that the objective should be to give the public all the access possible to the lake. He spoke of unimpeded access which has not been the case for many, many years. “The public does not know they can walk to the water’s edge on some pieces of property the city owns. There are no signs indicating that the property is public.” At the foot of St. Paul there is a large boulder with a street number on it leaving the clear impression that this is private land. The old Waterfront Access and Protection Advisory Committee did a survey of every piece of land the city owns from King Road through to Burloak and put on the public record how many instances there were of the public being kept off land they had a right to be on.

Wingfield was for option 1, keep the land and developed it into a parkette – although not in the immediate future – perhaps five years or more into the future. Wingfield said he could live with option 2 which was to lease the piece of land in the middle and create windows onto the lake at Market and St. Paul Street. Wingfield wanted to see public access capacity the lake’s edge grow. He felt the current land owners should not be disrupted and that change should come about in an orderly manner which he saw as expansion over the passage of time.

At least one of the property owners actually encroaches on city land – these are very minor encroachments but encroachments nevertheless.

Mayor Goldring asked what Wingfield thought the timing of bringing the property into public use might be. Three to five years perhaps. ”What`s wrong with today” asked the Mayor.

Councillor Dennison didn’t see it that way and made the bold statement that there was never going to be a waterfront trail through the area. The best option for the city, he said, was to sell the land between the road allowances to the owners of property that adjoins it and develop public spaces at the ends of the road allowances.

The property owners loved that idea.

The Swartz/Connell residence is the only one of the three properties that abut the city land along the waterfront that runs from Lakeshore Road right through to the lake. The other two properties have houses between them and LAkeshore Road.

Janice Connell whose property adjoins the city owned land delegated for herself and the other two property owners who are directly impacted by the purchase or lease of what is now city and provincially owned land.

Connell’s complaint was of the nuisance and noise that came from rowdy young people who did whatever you can imagine at the bottom of St. Paul particularly but at the bottom of Market as well.

She made reference to the graffiti – and there is some. Very little actually and it isn’t visible unless you are on the water. She complained that because the land is not visible from the street it doesn’t get decent police patrol. Wouldn’t take much more than a letter to the police from the Mayor or the city manager to solve that problem. Get the police officers out of their cars and do a walk around – it’s not more than 125 yards overall.

Janice Connell spoke for herself and her neighbours at the council committee meeting last week. The neighbours are seated behind Ms Connell

Connell told the Committee that someone was once skate boarding along the top of the breakwater. Actually skateboarding? That is a massive stretch. I walked that stone breakwater and it is quite a drop to the water’s edge. It is literally impossible to skateboard over the ground. I had some difficulty walking without stumbling. It is a very significant drop from the top of the breakwater to the lake and when you get to the bottom there are a lot of rocks. The height down however is less than a drop from the pier and a heck of a lot less than a drop from the edges of Kerncliffe Park.

What Connell/Swartz did was raise every hairy dog argument they could find to push their point – which by the way is their right. They want that property and they will argue as hard as they can to convince this council to give it sell it to them.

The argument that there are no site lines to any parkette is true – there are many park places in this city where there is not clear site line. However, this is a very small area – less than a 200 yard walk from one side to the other. It would give police officer a little exercise and fresh air to get out of their cars and walk the area each time a cruiser is on patrol. It would also give the police officers an opportunity to take in the wonderful view that the three property owners enjoy every hour of every day.

When one is making an appeal you put the best face you’ve got forward and the property owners chose well. Connell was perky, spoke well, and was able to get a chuckle out of council on occasion. She felt “blessed” to live where she lives. The money to be able to buy the property didn’t hurt either. She answered the questions and gave very detailed answers to questions and put her own spin on the answers she gave. She was good at it – that’s why she was chosen to be the front person. Advertisers do that all the time – put a pretty face out front and use the words and the images you need to make your point.

Early in her presentation Connell said that the old Waterfront Access and Protection Advisory Committee created the notion that this was public land and traffic increased considerably. That the land is public was not a notion – it is a fact. For many years no one knew that the land was public – and the property owners loved that. Their neighbour, James Zeigler pointed out that for years these people had the use of the land without paying as much as a penny.

Connell told Council that “three or four nights of every summer evening we would call the police”. She said she thought it virtually impossible to secure with a fence

“One of the things that hasn’t been calculated” explained Connell, “ is the potential cost of a court case – because that’s what the landowners would probably end up doing – not that we want to.”

Janice Connell after delegating to city council i committee – She thinks she just might have nailed it!

In closing Connell said, “we really want to buy this land” and leasing is really not an option”.

Meed Ward wanted to know what the grounds for a court case would be. Connell wasn’t prepared to take that one on – so she asked if her husband could speak. Out came the big guns: Mike Swartz a very, very successful banker made it very clear that the property owners were prepared to bring in legal counsel which they had already retained – and who might have been in the Council Chamber taking it all in.

Mike Swartz, delivering a very hard message to city council. We don’t want to sue but we will if we have to. They have already retained legal counsel.

Swartz said, when asked what the grounds were for a court case: “I would never divulge that at this time but you have to understand that we that we do have significant monetary and historical arguments that could and would be presented.” He added that the rationale exists to solve this tonight in a very equitable basis for everyone involved.

That solution – sell us the land.

There it was – the chilly wind of a court case had been put out there and if Connell’s mention was not enough her husband Mike Swartz drove the point home.

James Ziegler delegated next. He has lived on St. Paul for 24 years and he was for keeping ownership of the land in the city’s hands and perhaps leasing it to the three houses that abut that piece of the property. He was for not selling the city property even though if it were turned into a parkette with a trail through it everyone who used the trail would walk or bicycle by his house on St. Paul.

James Ziegler;er. a resident whose property does not abut the land under discussion but who does live on St. Paul Street along the road allowance produced a map showing where he thinks the city should put in a walking path that would run through the road allowances and the property that some residents want to purchase. Ziegler wants as much public access as possible.

In comments made after his delegation Ziegler said “I’m glad the committee agreed to the windows to the lake on Market St. and St. Paul Street. I also appreciated that Councillor Mead Ward made the motion and spoke to option one – keeping the land and developing it into a parkette.

“It was unfortunate that most of the other members were unswayed by the presentations and comments of city staff and that they could not at least preserve the Water Street lands for a future council to consider. They appear to be entrenched with the status quo and fearful of the threat of litigation by the two land owners.

“It’s a lack of vision for the long term public good driven by near term financial conservatism ruled by the 0.1% of the population. Unfortunate also for the many thousands of other citizens of Burlington within walking distance of the former Water Street road allowance who could have enjoyed a larger view to the lake.”

After all the delegations Council let itself begin to believe that the city didn’t need any more parkland in the area – that there was more than enough with Nelson Park just three houses over from St. Paul, the most easterly street.

Nelson Park isn’t a very big park and comes nowhere near meeting the needs of the community. Were one to look at City View Park and the park the city wants to see developed in the Beachway – what exists at Nelson is puny.

But the need for a new park was not the issue. Hear how your council failed to grasp what the issue really is. Councillor Sharman said this was “an ideological issue”, suggesting that Meed Ward has an approach to what the long term future of the city is about that is not in sync with what most people in Burlington want.

Mayor Goldring chimed in a few minutes later and agree that it was an ideological issue.

Meed Ward kept pointing to the regional Official Plan, the city’s Official Plan and the Strategic Plan as well. Mayor Goldring managed to find a way to explain that the city didn’t have to worry about getting more waterfront land in the future because if there ever was any development along the edge of the water the developer would have to dedicate some of land being developed as a park allowance.

Councillors Dennison and Taylor let themselves get tied up with the costs that might be involved. There is a very, very minimal cost to the city to keep the land – maintenance, $7500 a year, which Meed Ward said she could fund out of her Council expense account.

Dennison mentioned several times that the homes have been in place for 90 to 100 years – and perhaps they were. Certainly not in the name of the same owners.

Part of the problem with the debate was that the Staff Report left something to be desired. This issue has never been one that staff was welcomed; they saw the issue as a major mess that was going to get dumped on their desks.

Staff was certainly for retaining the land – they just knew that when it gets really tough the crap is going to land on them because the majority of Council is not prepared to make the hard decisions.

In 1985 a Burlington city council approved the building of a 22 story building right on the edge of the lake where the Riviera Motel was located. They will break ground for that structure late this years or early next and Burlington will see three building on Lakeshore that rise 22, 8 and 7 storeys high. At the time, back in 1985, the project was to be a legacy for the city.

Things change and no one can say with any certainty what Lakeshore Road will look like 50 years from mow. A number of people, most with vested interests in obtaining the property or not wanting to see a park in the area said there would never be a trail along the water’s edge in that part of the city.

The existing Waterfront Trail and the Bruce trail suggest that kind of thinking just doesn’t hold up.

There was next to nothing in terms of cost to the city, there are millions ($9.7 million to be exact) in the city’s Park’s Reserve fund.

With delegations done Council members get to ask staff questions on the report that was being debated.

Councillor Dennison had put a cost of $2 to $3 million dollars as what this was going to cost the city. Meed Ward asked staff if this was the number they were using. Ron Steiginga, Manager Realty Services, responded with “that is not our number”.

This issue is mired with all kinds of legal history, most of which Council was not prepared to share with the public. There was a Court case some time ago where a purchaser sued a buyer of property in this immediate area and a Judge rendered a decision that has really muddied things. Decisions in Court cases are public and the city has these decisions – they, for reasons of their own, are not prepared to share the information they have. That kind of information management makes it very difficult for residents to make an informed decision.

After listening to the delegations Meed Ward put forward a motion to have the city go with the first option which was to not sell the land but to develop it as a parkette. Meed Ward explained that she considered option # 2, leasing the land, but felt the issue had to be dealt with now to at least give the property owners some clarity as to just what they have and don’t have and what they can expect from their city.

With the motion on the floor Councillor Sharman, who was chair of the committee, moved that Council go into Closes Session to hear what the city lawyers had to say. They were in closed session for close to an hour and were fully briefed on what past legal history was all about.

One of the things about decisions Judges make is they can be appealed and changed. You the public have no idea what these decisions are – but you can bet your very last dollar that the people who have said they are quite prepared to sue the city and force them to sell the land, have copies of those court decisions. They have the financial means to get copies of the transcripts of the trials and the legal talent to explain what the options are and where there might be some loopholes.

It was easier for this city council to take the position that the city doesn’t need another park in that part of the city and even if they did – the city doesn’t have the money needed to put in another park.

Their position was to upgrade Nelson Park, make the road allowances at the foot of Market and St. Paul Windows on the Lake, which should have been done years ago, and hope they can get away with it.

Once Council was out of Closed Session Dennison announced that he had an amendment to Meed Ward’s motion. There was a procedural kafuffle that called for Council to vote on the Meed Ward motion first and then the Dennison amendment.

Meed Ward lost her motion – six to one. No one else voted with her.

That then put the Dennison motion on the table which was to sell the land and do a little work on the Market Street and St. Paul Street road allowances.

The Mayor didn’t think the park was necessary at this point in time.

Councillor Craven claimed he was a big supporter of parks and reminded council that “muddled decisions get us in trouble”. He reminded Council that “we cannot ignore the reality of the legal history” and then pointed to the problems at 710 Spring Garden Road where there are parks right next to private property which creates all kinds of problems in his ward.

Craven saw this as a “unique and isolated” piece of property and said there was “no hope that we are ever going to connect this to some other piece of property” For Craven putting a parkette in this space was impractical and cumbersome.

Councillor Taylor saw the issue a one of how many parks does a neighbourhood need. He said he doesn’t know of any other section of the city where there three parks within six houses of each other – which is stretching the reality somewhat.

Taylor also reminded Council that there was a massive ($160 million) infrastructure deficit facing the city and that we have just five years to figure out how we are going to manage this.

His position was that he could not support a park now or in the future and was going to support the Dennison motion and get something for the land.

Councillor Lancaster said the Meed Ward motion assumed there was a need for the parks. She said she understood the need to preserve the land for the future and thought that leasing the land was a reasonable solution.

When staff was asked Rob Peachey, Manager Facilities, Parks and Recreation said he believed Burlington should preserve the land for the future. He added that development patterns frequently change and there might at some point be a continuous path along the water’s edge.

The issue of intensification came up – many said it was not likely to happen in that part of town when it is already happening. The two-plexes that exist on St. Paul have been upgraded to four plexes – that sounds like intensification to me – and – just a little further east on Lakeshore Councillor Dennison has a case going to the OMB arguing for the right to severe a piece of his property into a second lot he will sell. Sounds like intensification to me.

Vandalism and noise came up again and again. Councillor Sharman said Council has no influence on the way people behave and that he didn’t think Council had the right to make a decision that was going to make the lives of the people in the old Water Street part of the town miserable.

Meed Ward countered with “we cannot let the behaviour of some of our young people determine how we use our parks resources”.

So there it was a 6-1 vote with Meed Ward once again standing her groundd. The issue comes to city council on the 15^th for a final vote.

James Ziegler is apparently not a man to trifle with nor does he appear to give in easily. He intends to prepare revised drawings and have some of his neighbours attend and delegate.

Ziegler is trying to dig out police reports on just how many complaints there have been about behavior at Nelson Park as well as at the other Windows on the Lake in the city.

One group has recommended any city decision to sell the land be challenged with a class action law suit on the grounds that the city has failed to follow its own policies, the regional policy and failed to act in the public good. That would be an interesting argument and apparently there is someone prepared to fund some lawyer to take the case.

Zeigler sees any decision to sell any of the land as a short-sighted decision depriving the citizens of their rights to improved access to the lake one that effects many future generations.

Council can expect to see a map showing the lineal footage of lake view that a Water Street park would provide compare to the available footage of the other access points along lakeshore east of the downtown. This will show that is it not such a small park.

Expect to see a population map showing the numbers of households and estimated population within a 2Km distance of the park. Expect to see a drawing showing some actual dimensions. Committee was told this was a small park between three houses leaving a false impression. The “houses” are mansions with very large lots.

This fight is not over yet.

Where is the old Save our Waterfront group in all this? They were said to be several thousand strong with representation in every ward in the city. Will we see them out in force?

What I found interesting about the way this committee meeting went was how Council members took the word of Connell/Swartz as if it was all perfectly true and completely factual. This is not to suggest they were lying – they were giving their version f the truth. I want to suggest there are other versions of the truth out there and that this city council needs to hear and respond to those other version as well and not be quite so quick to sell city land that wealthy people want.

Somehow during a few hours on a Wednesday evening of last week, city council lost their way and went along with the selling of the property when there was no pressing reason to do so.

What was particularly disappointing was that the two most senior members of council, Taylor and Dennison, men with 22 and 20 years at the council table, voted to sell the land. One would have hoped that they, of all people, would have understood the thinking and feelings the people of Burlington have for their waterfront. Perhaps that many years as Council members had addled their brains. Term limits begin to make sense.

The matter will come to a city council meeting for final approval. Perhaps there will be enough phone calls and emails to bring this council to their senses.

Councillor Meed Ward stood alone in voting for either keeping the property or leasing it out to the residents until the city figures out what it wants to do.

Rob Peachey, Manager Facilities, Parks and Recreation told the old Waterfront Advisory Committee that waterfront access was not his favourite file – now we know why.

Why does your city council want to sell waterfront property rather than create a stunning lake front parkette?

A two part series on the selling of waterfront land owned by the city

Part 1

Part 2

October 7, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. Our city Council is adrift. They have lost their way. Six of the seven council members, the ones that talk about the jewel on the lake and the need to give the public access to the lake, last week put up their hands to approve, in principle, selling waterfront land to a very small group of residents.

A portion of the land at the foot of St. Paul Street that city council wants to sell the private property owners instead of putting in a park they say the community doesn’t need.

These Council members have lost sight of one of the guiding principles behind every policy the city has – save as much of the waterfront as possible, stop the quarrying on the Escarpment and keep highways out of north Burlington.

This Council is prepared to basically obliterate a functioning, albeit small, community to create a massive park but seems prepared to actually sell of a small strip of land that is right next to the water. It’s not a very long strip of land but it is land, and as a Texas land owner once said: “Sister, don’t give up the land. They are not making land anymore.” But your city council doesn’t see it that way

Despite layer upon layer of policy from the province, the Region and city hall – this Council decided they should sell the property to the three residents who want to buy.

In selling the land the city is selling the birthright of every citizen and that of all future citizens. They are not selling the blood of the city – they are selling the bone marrow, for once that land is sold it will take more guts than anyone in this city has ever had get it back. Burlington will be forever changed – all because six people you elected don’t feel the city needs another park.

Councillor Taylor said the city already has enough parkland. Not in that part of the city, but that’s not the point. There is a large goal, a larger objective and that is to get as much of the lakefront land in the hands of the city so that it can be made available to the public.

There is nothing wrong with people owning property on the lake front. They bought and paid for it and it is theirs to use as they wish. At some point that property will be back on the market and the city can, if it so chooses, look for ways to add to the land bank that will at some point in the future allow for more space for people to walk along the edge of the lake just the way they do now walk along Spencer Smith Park and the way they go out to the pier – in droves.

The Pier – remember – it was the “Mistake on the Lake”; hundreds wanted it torn down. Today there is hardly an hour of the day when people aren’t out there.

The trail through what is now Beachway Park – that was once a railway line. In the early 1900’s few would have thought the rail lines would be torn out and a walking path put in.

The issue is the portion shown as parkette. The city had three options: keep the land and develop it as a parkette, lease the land to adjoining property owners until the city decides on its long term use or sell the land. The want to sell it.

We kept hearing people say that there would never be a real waterfront trail along all of the edge of Lake Ontario. Perhaps not in our lifetimes – but if the city keeps the land that it has and adds to what it has over time this city might have a waterfront like that in Chicago.

The Bruce Trail started out as an idea and look what they’ve done with that vision.

The issue is less than half an acre of land – but like everything about property it is location, location, location.

To vote to sell this strip of land is to forget about what Burlington is all about. Should the vote done at Committee be approved at Council on the 15^th a part of the waterfront we now own will have been lost for a very long time, probably forever – because six clowns chose to forget what the city is really about – the waterfront.

Is your city council about to sell your birthright? Waterfront land just east of the downtown core may be sold.

Part one a two part report on the city selling waterfront property.

Part 2

Salt with Pepper – Opinion

October 5^th, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. City Council, sitting as a Committee last week voted 6-1 to sell small parcels of land it owns on the waterfront between Market and St Paul Street to property owners whose land abuts the city property.

The Market Street and St. Paul Street windows are land already owned by the city. The land shown as parkette is also land owned by the city which council has indicated it is prepared to sell to private landowners. The property is actually owned by the provincial Ministry of Natural Resources and the city. MNR has apparently said they will go along with whatever the city wants to do.

This report came to a city council committee as the result of a Staff Direction put forward by Ward 2 Councilor Marianne Meed Ward in 2012. . It’s genesis goes back to the since sunset Waterfront Access Protection and Advisory Committee(WAPAC) that was formed by former Mayor Cam Jackson.

The since sunset Waterfront Access and Protection Advisory Committee produced a report with good graphics that set out what existed in the way of city owned land that could be opened up more effectively to the public.

One of the smarter things WAPAC did was forward a recommendation to city council that the matter of actual access to the lake be improved. That committee did an excellent report on just what existed in the way of waterfront access and where the public’s right to access to the lakefront was being impeded.

During the WAPAC committee discussions Rob Peachey, Manager Parks & Open Space appeared looking less than enthusiastic when he told the committee – “this is not one of my favourite files”. We know now why Peachey made that comment.

At the time some residents were pushing for more and better public access to the waterfront in this part of the city

Burlington once had a very proud history of opening up access to the lake and was the city in which former Toronto Mayor David Crombie officially opened the Waterfront Trail that now runs form Niagara Falls to the Quebec border and reaches into parts of Lake Erie.

When Crombie was in Burlington in 2011 speaking to WAPAC he touched on Burlington’s past Waterfront achievements and said there was a time when Burlington was a leader in waterfront access but that that was no longer the case. At the time, mayor Goldring, who was sitting beside Crombie didn’t say a word. We should have seen his vote of last week coming.

Crombie was back in Burlington recently to witness awards being given in his name to the two women who did most of the yeoman’s work in making the Waterfront Trail a reality. Burlington had much to be proud of then.

In her Staff Direction Meed Ward asked Council to: Direct the Manager of Realty Services to report back to the Budget and Corporate Services Committee regarding the portion of Water Street located between St. Paul Street and Market Street providing the background and history and options available to the city.

That Direction resulted in the report that was before Committee October 2^nd, along with it was a confidential legal report that has certainly muddied the waters. Unfortunately the contents of that report are not public.

When a municipality makes decision it has to refer to and comply with the policies of those levels of government higher up the food chain: Regional and Provincial

The Halton Regional Official Plan – designates all of Burlington’s shoreline as“Regional Natural Heritage System” Part of that policy is: “To protect and enhance the Halton waterfront as major resource t hat is part of the Provincially significant Lake Ontario and Burlington Bay shoreline.” It is also to” “Encourage the development of trails within the Regional Natural Heritage system” and “Encourage the Local Municipalities to: Acquire public open space on tableland adjacent to water courses and along the waterfront within the Urban Area and Identify and designate along or near the waterfront of Lake Ontario and Burlington Bay,a continuous waterfront trail,making use of public road allowances in locations where public waterfront properties are not available”

Burlington’s Official Plan calls for The acquisition of land to create new or add to existing Windows-to-the-Lake/Bay, as a means to increase public access to the waterfront.

This is the lakefront at the foot of St. Paul.

Burlington uses three types of access: The Waterfront Trail, Windows on the Lake and small Parkettes.

Waterfront Trail is a continuous Trail that was to be implemented through development-and/or redevelopment along Lake Ontario and Burlington Bay where there is sufficient land between that water and a public or private road.This trail maybe composed of two components: a shoreline trail immediately abutting the Lake or Bay, and near shoreline trail located in the general vicinity of the Lake or Bay.

Windows-to-the-Lake are described as small public areas located on city road allowances next to Lake Ontario or Burlington Bay; established to increase public access to the waterfront. They are typically developed with the following amenities: Seating areas, Walkway connections to the community, bike racks and refuse containers, fencing or barriers to control access to the water, parking located in the widow or on street depending on size, existing vegetation and configuration, bollards or railings to keep vehicles on the road allowance and signage to identify the location as a Window-to-the-Lake.

Parkettes are described as small landscaped venues intended to contribute to an area’s urban design, provide passive/rest areas and lower level park amenities and are typically developed with the following amenities: Seating areas, walkway connections to the community, bike racks and refuse containers. Some include creative playground structures, tree and shrub plantings, park signage and some fencing for demarcation of public and private property.

Waterfront Trail policies were introduced in the 1997 Official Plan. Since that time limited development along the waterfront has occurred. Waterfront Trail policy development objectives have resulted in the city expanding the waterfront trail and public ownership including Easterbrook town house development at the Royal Botanical Gardens, where the city required public waterfront access through he official plan amendment and rezoning application resulting in Spring Garden Trail.

Another splendid addition to the waterfront trail network is the pathway at the bottom of the Bridgewater condominium hotel development at the foot of Elizabeth Street where the city will take ownership of the waterfront trail and the shoreline protection work required through development agreements.

That’s the policy base the decision at the Community Services Committee made their decision within.

The Staff Report that got voted on put forward three options:

Option #1: Create a city parkette: connecting the St.Paul Street and market street road allowances.

Option # 2: Develop Windows-on-the-Lake at St. Paul and Market streets and retain ownership with an exclusive lease to the abutting landowners until required for public use.

Option # 3: Develop Windows-on-the-Lake and dispose of the Water Street parcel.

Option #3 would dispose of the Water Street land and still develop the Windows-on-the-Lake on the East and West sides of the site where the city owns the road allowance.

This is market street. It is hard to tell but that patch of land on the left is actually a city right of way that anyone can walk along to the edge of the lake. The city has never put signs up advising the public they can walk on the property – which is the way the property owners along the street like it.

This is the land at the end of Market Street, owned by the city, public but there are no signs to indicate it is public. Few people walk past that bright sign. The city would turn this into a full window on the Lake.

Wonderful place to sit and watch the sun rise or set – and it is public property that the city has agreed in principle to sell the people with adjoining property.

Staff recommended Option # 2: preserving the land for future use. They justified their decision based on Regional and city official policy and the Waterfront Trail policy.

Opportunities for waterfront access, financial considerations and those legal considerations that the public knows nothing about because they were the contents of the reports the city solicitor provided and had council declare confidential, are lost if the land is sold.

The sale of the land would be a fabulous deal for the three property owners. They grump about the cost of maintaining the sea wall. Were it not maintained their property would at some point face serious erosion.

Staff offered a lot of common sense when they said a decision to retain the property in public ownership maintains the table lands between the Windows on the Lake for future access to the waterfront. Future access is ensured with the retention of the Water Street parcel.

Over the short term access is improved with the development of Windows-on-the-Lake, which should have been done years ago.

What would the different option cost: Both capital and current budget impacts for each option would be as follows:

Option #1 Option One- Create a Parkette on Water Street Parcel includes costs to construct and maintain Windows-to-the-Lake. Capital Budget Impact: $182,000 Current Budget Impact $7,500/per year. Other considerations: Land costs and shoreline protection which are set out in that confidential document that you don`t get to see.

Option Two- Preserve for Future use: Includes costs to construct and maintain Windows -to-the-Lake. Capital costs: $80,000 and current budget cost of $3,500 per year for Windows-to- the-Lake. Add in land costs and shoreline protection as set out in that confidential document. One has to wonder just how much the city is obligating itself to pony up within that confidential document. Last within option # 2: Future cost to develop Parkette is $102,000

Option Three – Dispose of Water Street Parcel and develop Windows-to-the-Lake. A capital cost of $80,000 and a current budget cost of $3,500 per year for Windows-to- the-Lake. The upside for this option is the revenues from sale of lands. That confidential document doesn’t let you know what that revenue might be.

In the Staff report mention is made of how all this costs will be handled. Mention is also made about a community engagement process. This is rich:

“Upon receiving direction from council on an approved option, staff will develop and undertake a community engagement process which outlines the purpose, outcomes and participation goals of any engagement opportunity. Outcome of the public engagement process will be reported back to Council with the concept plans for the Windows-on-the-Lake and parkette development.

What this means is you will get to have a say on what those Windows on the Lake are going to look like and how the parkette might be designed – but you won’t be asked whether or not you want waterfront land sold.

Six of the significant seven are going to do that for you. The family jewels will be sold off for the puniest of reasons and the opportunity for a trail that actually lets people see, hear and feel the waters of Lake Ontario will be gone forever. For once lakefront land is in private hands it seldom gets back into public hands. One those few occasions when privately held land does get back into the public realm it is frequently at a price equivalent to a King’s ransom.

Why are we doing this – we already own the land.

Grenade found in the ground in the Kerncliffe Park area found to be inert.

October 4, 2013

By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON. Just after 10:00 a.m., Saturday morning, a volunteer group doing maintenance in the area of Kerncliffe Park located a grenade buried in the ground.

Kerncliffe Park – site where an inert grenade was found by volunteers cleaning up the grounds.

A number of volunteers were safely evacuated and members of the Explosive Disposal Unit were summoned to the scene

It has since been determined that the grenade was inert.

A portion of green space to the west of Kerns Road and south of a nearby parkette remains cordoned off while a secondary ground search is undertaken.

There are no secondary public safety concerns at this time.

Police later declared the scene as totally safe.

Is the Prime Minister moving into gunslinger mode? Is Canada about to become a major arms manufacturer?

October 4, 2013

By Ray Rivers

BURLINGTON, ON. Memorable leaders leave noteworthy accomplishments behind them. In the US ObamaCare will be that president’s legacy, even though it represents a glass half-full to us in Canada. Tommy Douglas is remembered for introducing universal health care, while Premier of Saskatchewan in 1962; and Pierre Trudeau and Lester Pearson credited for implementing it nation-wide.

Avro Arrow – fighter plane that was to make us the envy of the western world.

Pearson also gave us our flag and won the Nobel prize while positioning Canada as a global peacemaker. John Diefenbaker’s biggest accomplishment was drafting our first Bill of Rights but he will only ever be remembered for killing the best fighter jet in its time, the Avro Arrow. Brian Mulroney led an effective anti-apartheid lobby, but his name brings up the US free-trade deal, the dreaded GST and that nasty Karl-Heinz affair.

Trudeau eliminated the terrorist FLQ, introduced bilingualism and multiculturalism, made Canada a global entertainment force, implemented a half-hearted metric system, and really got Albertans ticked with his energy program. And Jean Chretien gave us the long-gun registry – a bill which had the early support of a newly minted Calgary MP named Stephen Harper, voting against his own colleagues with the Reform Party caucus.

One of Harper’s first actions, as PM, in 2006 was to arm our border guards – who had never needed nor wanted the guns. He is a tough cop as PM, introducing mandatory prison sentences here, extending Canada’s role in Afghanistan, and sending war planes into Libya. And this summer Harper got to actually fire a rifle while reaffirming his determination to maintain sovereignty in the arctic.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper – showing the troops how its done as he fires a service long gun while in the Arctic

Few people have difficulty supporting a tough-minded PM, trying to keep us safe from threats of internal or external violence. So his change-of-mind on the long gun registry and his cancellation of the program, a much celebrated event by his party, was bizarre. I thought banning guns was ‘de rigueur’ for a sheriff taming the Wild West. Perhaps he has bought the US Tea Party line that private guns are the only defence against an oppressive government.

The long gun registry had given Harper a wedge issue to solidify his right-wing base and adjust his moral compass to accompany his change-of-heart. His next step was to deconstruct his firearms advisory committee, and pack it with members of Canada’s National Firearms Association, Canada’s NRA. https://nfa.ca/news/nfa-supports-sensible-government-approach-att One of the new committee’s early recommendations was to legalize the sale of assault weapons, which the government fortunately ignored.

Weren’t we all stunned when the PM rebuked the RCMP in High River? He ordered them to return the weapons they had found, stored illegally, in the flooded homes in that Alberta town. The Mounties were only enforcing the law, so does this now mean that we can ignore the rest of Canada’s gun laws with impunity? What is this pre-occupation with guns anyway? I know a six-year-old boy who is also fascinated with guns – but aren’t we supposed to grow up?

Last week Canada announced that we would not be joining over 90 other nations, including gun-loving USA, to sign the UN Arms Trade treaty, which is intended to keep weapons out of the hands of terrorist nations and terrorists. At first this was puzzling, then the penny dropped. The Harper government has a strategy to transition Canada into a future as a significant arms manufacturing country. It all makes sense now.

Stephen Harper, already the nation’s historic gunslinger, wants to be its gunsmith as well. Is this the industrial strategy Ontario and Quebec have been looking for? We’ll build weapons systems for rogue states and fuel them with oil from the tar sands. Harper’s quest is to create gold out of that dark place called war, thereby bringing jobs back to the voters in Canada’s industrial heartland and reversing the folly of Diefenbaker denying the Avro Arrow.

Canada will be completely transformed from historic peacemaker to ‘nouvelle’ arms-maker. That will be Harper’s mark, his legacy, and how he will be remembered after losing the next federal election.

A knight, without a horse, walks off into the darkest night…

On a quest for a treasure, that shines so bright.

A six-shooter on his left, his right he cannot use…

In search of a dark tower, others can only muse.

(The Gunslinger’s Tale – Ellen Walmsley, 1999)

IKEA move in jeopardy? Getting all the paper work done is going to be a challenge. Is the province cooperating?

October 3, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. It is going to be a scramble to get all the paper work done in time for IKEA to meet some deadlines that are out there.

The first hard date is October 21^st when the Development and Infrastructure Committee will go over a report that covers details that have to be approved at that Committee level. It is vital that the report staff produces be approved at that Committee meeting.

Red line at the op is the railway line – that isn’t going to move. Dark line on the right is the creek that has to be dealt with and Conservation Halton isn’t making that easy. Lot of room for the interchange upgrades that are going to be needed to handle the volume of traffic.

The schedule is now so tight that council members will move from meeting as a Standing Committee on the evening of the 21^st into meeting as a city council to pass the zoning by-law change IKEA needs to build its new office/retail operation on the site.

There is a mandatory 20 day comment period when a change is made in a zoning by-law.

While everyone waits out that 20 day period, documents from Conservation Halton have to be signed. Conservation is involved because there is a creek running along the east side of the property.

But that isn’t the only issue that has to be resolved and, longer term, it isn’t the toughest one. The intersection at Walkers Line is reaching capacity. Changing the configuration of an intersection like Walkers Line is no small matter.

Currently located on Plains Road in Aldershot IKEA has wanted to move for some time and committed to staying in Burlington – why not this is a great market and IKEA is a top tourist draw for the city. Then the complications set in and the project is getting close to needing life support.

IKEA has been toiling away since before March of 2011 on plans to move their operation from Aldershot to a piece of land on the North Service Road just west of Walkers Line where there are multiple problems that someone didn’t see coming their way.

IKEA made a corporate decision to move and put together an agreement with Hopewell, the company that owns the land on the North Service Road.

It didn’t take a rocket scientist to see immediately that the North Service Road could not handle the traffic that would be created with an IKEA on the Hopewell property.

Widening the North Service Road would be necessary but there were problems there because North Service is cheek by jowl with the QEW which itself is going to be widened in the not too distant future.

A walk along North Service between Guelph Line and Walkers Line suggests that property could be bought to widen the road but there is at least one large structure that is going to have a road very close to it when widening takes place..

Add to that the Creek that winds its way down the east side of the property and dips under the QEW and is governed by Conservation Halton rules and you get a sense of what IKEA is up against.

Did the planners that IKEA engaged not do their homework? Did they not make themselves aware of all the problems they would incur? When they first talked to Burlington’s planners did the Planning department not brief them?

The IKEA development is the first initiative seen in what the city calls one of its prime development areas. This one is called the Prosperity Corridor and covers both sides of the QEW from Appleby on the east to Brant on the west with the focus at this point on the Guelph Line – Walkers Line stretch.

City hall is realizing that a change made to Walkers Line and the QEW ripples through to the other major intersections. City hall has also learned that you just don’t come along with a development application and expect the province to take a serious interest in what you want to do.

The province takes a much longer term approach and the next time the Burlington intersections along the QEW come up for a hard close look with a cheque book in their hand is 2016 – and that’s when they begin looking at what might be needed.

IKEA wants to be OPEN in its new location the spring of 2015 with shovels in the ground before the end of this year if they can get the paper work out of the way.

North Service Road looking west: There is room to widen the road; not sure how Leon’s will feel about giving up some frontage so people can get to IKEA.

Report providing information regarding 3455 North Service Road (IKEA Properties Limited) (PB-82-13) (Referred to the October 21, 2013 Development & Infrastructure meeting)

The city has growth plans that cannot be met without significant development in the Prosperity Corridor

The Walkers Line /QEW upgrades are critical

Land west of Walkers Line has been purchased for the development of 300,000 sq/ft of industrial office space. It is not clear at this point if this is ‘new development’ and what stage it is at.

IKEA alone accounts for half of the new Industrial Commercial construction forecast for 2013 – thus if the deal in the works now doesn’t close before the end of the year – there goes the forecast and up go residential taxes – unless the finance people raid some of those fat reserve funds the city has tucked way.

One of the city’s top tourist destinations is going to move to the property on the left. Widening this road to three lanes isn’t going to handle the traffic – and left hand turns are going to be terrible. Lots of work to be done on this file – and the clock is ticking.

Making the North Service Road work as a development site is not going to be easy and the city knows now that it needs partners from the private sector as well as more from the Region and the province.

Problem is the province doesn’t think the city needs the kind of help it is talking about.

The agreements that are being readied for signature have IKEA paying all the short term costs – these will get spelled out in the report that wasn’t tabled last night.

The city and the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) will pay all the costs for the long term – which refers to the cost of reconfiguring Walkers Line and the North Service Road.

This would seem like one of those situations where Burlington General Manager Scott Stewart needs to get all the players in the same room at the same time and give them a solid dose of his “tough love”. He once took on a group of soccer Moms and if a deal can be worked out with that crowd, IKEA should be a cake walk.

But it doesn’t look like that today – does it?

Friday is not a casual dress day for city’s legal department. Airpark court case to be heard Friday.

October 3^rd, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. If you want to talk to people in the city’s legal department this week – do it today, because most of the brains in that department will be in Milton on Friday, sitting in a Courtroom hearing an application that has been made by both the city and the Burlington Executive Airpark over who gets to call the shots when it comes to changing the way land is used.

What was thought to be a sleepy little airport became a massive problem for the city

The city creates by-laws and believes everyone has to abide by the bylaws in place. The Airpark argues that they don’t have to follow the city’s bylaws because they are regulated by the federal Department of Transportation.

The airport began making massive changes to their site about five years ago. The city, the Region and Conservation Halton didn’t pay much attention to what was being done at what had been a sleepy little rural airport. They understood that the airpark came under federal jurisdiction and were content to leave it at that.

When it became evident that the airpark was being upgraded significantly the city asked then ordered the airpark management to apply for the necessary permits.

Nope said the airpark people. There was some back and forth – the city sued them, they sued the city and it became evident that there were serious differences of opinion over how the laws the airpark were relying upon were to be interpreted.

So, back in late August, lawyers for both the city and the Airpark met in a Courtroom and agreed this had to be resolved and set October 4^th as the day a judge would listen to arguments on arcane points of law. Both the city and the airpark brought in big legal guns and for the past seven weeks have been doing their “examination for discovery”, which is that period of time when they get to ask all kinds of questions.

Each side then prepares its brief and files it with the Court.

Someone in the Court house decides which judge is going to hear the arguments and at just after 10:00 am a bailiff will call out All Rise, the Judge will enter and the game begins.

There will not be any witnesses, there won’t be any television type court room drama; just some very smart lawyers arguing important differences on what was meant when a federal law was written and how that law impacts on a different level of government.

North Burlington residents have taken it in the ear over this issue – they have put up with trucks driving up and down the roads hauling landfill. When they found out how much fill was being taken onto the airpark site they were alarmed and made their concerns known to city hall and the regional government.

Delegations were made at both city hall and the Region during which it became evident that Burlington didn’t know what was going on and the Region didn’t appear to be at all concerned. Some in Milton kind of like the idea of an airport being close to their part of the Region.

The residents were having none of it. They formed an interest group and showed up everywhere they could to press their point. Both the Region and the city got the message.

How does this kind of site alteration take place without a permit? If you’re an airpark and federally regulated – this is what you can get away with. The space atop that hill is where a helicopter landing is going to be located.

It quickly became very clear that the airpark people were not going to budge so the city sued. That got us to the point where everyone is before a judge who will hear an application for an interpretation of just what the law means. These are called judicial interpretations.

Each side, the city and the Airpark were originally given two hours to give their interpretation of what the federal law means. When all the talking is done, the judge tells them that the decision will be reserved and in a couple of months (this won’t be a case that is decided upon in a couple of weeks) a decision will be handed down and both sides will read that decision very, very carefully.

And then you can bet the wine allowance that the side most unhappy with the decision will appeal. There is the possibility that this case will go from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court.

In the meantime the Airpark development plans are frozen and that suites residents on Appleby Line and Bell School Line just fine.

One small question: Why did the city’s Community Services Committee go into Closed session to discuss a Confidential Legal department September 18^th report regarding the Burlington Executive Airport? Were the city’s lawyers seeking direction? Was there a glitch in the case law they were relying upon to make their case. It just seemed a little odd that there would be a Confidential report that close to the hearing date.

Councillors forgot how to play nice – behave like a couple of alley cats.

REVISED

There were errors in some of the data and facts in the original version which had to be confirmed. That took longer than expected. with the facts confirmed we can now re-publish this piece originally published September 25th,

October 3, 2103

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. Burlington has held City Council meetings that were done in less than half an hour. In and out, which is the way Mayor Goldring likes to see things happen.

In Burlington, Council members like to say that all the heavy lifting gets done at the committee level but the decisions is made at a Council meeting.

Monday night they held a Council meeting and they certainly made decisions that will impact this city for some time.

The first development this city has seen for some time will get the approval it needs – once some of the paper work is cleaned up. The Mayor got the unanimous vote he felt he needed with the Beachway Park as it now heads to the Region for a decision.

The environmentalists got left on hold with their ask for something in the way of a private tree bylaw.

There were far more delegations than usual at a Council meeting and yes, the Marsden’s made their regular delegation on the matter of accessibility.

The tension between Councillors Meed Ward and Craven is close to measurable, Neither has ever been a fan of the other and on Monday evening the feelings got spilled onto the horseshoe of the Council chamber

And we saw some pretty nasty back and forth between the Council members for Wards 1 and 2. Rick Craven and Marianne Meed Ward had at it for a minute or two and the public saw the acrimony that exists between those two. Synonyms for acrimony are bitterness, animosity, spitefulness, asperity and spite which Councillor Craven has had for Meed Ward almost since the day she became a member of Council.

The two have significantly different operating styles and Craven seems to be unable to control his dislike for Meed Ward. Last night he opened up and Meed Ward gave back as good as she got. The two sit beside each other which makes for some awkwardness.

The harsh words came out during the debate on the Beachway Park which happens to be in Ward 1 where Councillor Craven is not exactly supporting the wishes of the people who own property in the area. Craven appears to want city hall to stick to a plan that is decades old and is no longer a reflection on how parks are developed.

He gets apoplectic over what he believes are encroachments and changes to property that have been made without the required permits. Craven just does not want those people in that park and has done as much as he can to ensure the houses get purchased and torn down.

Councillor Meed Ward on the other hand is a very strong advocate of a community within the park and she makes no pretence about how she feels. For Craven this is messing around in his ward – Meed Ward feels she is the Councillor for the Ward 2 but responsible for the sane development of the city which is more than Craven can stomach – Monday evening he did the equivalent of an upchuck and let it all come out.

Craven caught the attention of the Mayor who was chairing the meeting and said he had two comments he wanted to make about the presentation Councillor Meed Ward had made about section 37 agreements. ‘We heard yet again said Craven for the 3^rd , 4^th and maybe 5^th time how section 37 agreements work. That is not what we heard from Meed Ward this evening and I don’t understand why Meed Ward doesn’t get it.

The Mayor then spoke about the problem the city had with this file and the need to get a better grip on just how social housing needs were going to be met. Mayor Goldring seldom speaks extemporaneously but rather reads from notes which results explanations that are a bit stilted. The information is in there – the passion and commitment don’t seem to come through – it’s just not something this man does all that well.

Councillor Meed Ward sits looking a little glum before she responds to Councillor Craven’s personal attached and asks that he stick to the issue and stop belittling residents, delegations and her as a council member.

Meed Ward puts up her hand to speak and she lets fly. Councillor Craven she said “I am going to ask you to stick to the issues – stick to the point. You have a habit of making it personal. You’ve done that to residents, you’ve done that to delegations and you’ve done it to me.”

“Stick to the issue. Tell me we don’t need affordable housing when I think we do.”

Mayor Goldring, looking for a way to take some of the tension out of the air asked that council members keep the tone civil.

Councillor Craven asked for the floor again and commented that it “was the member for Ward 2 who raised the issue of the Official Plan and that in Ward 1 there were two affordable housing projects.”

The public is now seeing some of the nastiness that has been behind the scenes with this council. It is close to impossible for most of the members of this council to say anything positive or nice about Marianne Meed Ward – but she has a following and they expect her to be Mayor of this city some day.

Hopefully she learns how Section 37 of the Planning Act works or the province gets rid of it before Meed Ward places the chain of office around her neck.

That will be a very, very hard day for Rick Craven.

Come on, come all – war chest needs to be built up.

October 3, 2013

By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON. If you wondered whether or not there would be a provincial election in the Spring look no further than Jane McKenna’s invitation to spend some time with her WHEN

Electronic invitation from the office of Jane McKenna – she wants you to attend her fund-raiser.

The Gazette has yet to see a single press release from the office of Burlington’s representative at Queen’s Park but when it comes to a fund-raiser the invitations go out to everyone.

The word would have gone out within the Tory caucus at Queen’s Park – start raising funds, there is going to be an election and McKenna is going to need a substantial war chest to win next time out.

The province might well see a provincial election before it experiences the scheduled municipal election in October 27th of 2014.

Burlington takes a big step to fully recognizing its role in the War of 1812. Took long enough.

October 2, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. It was a bright sunny day, one of those last reprieves summer sometimes gives while suggesting there is an Indian summer still ahead of us before the harvest season is over.

The bikes were out on the trails along the edge of the lake, Doors Open, the event that has historic and interesting places opening their doors for people to walk through and look around.

Rick Wilson, back to camera with War of 1812 enactor Robert Williamson talking over details of the desperate battles that played themselves out off the shores of Burlington 200 years ago.

A small group of people, some dressed up as re-enactors, were gathered on the promenade jutting out from the Naval Walk at the western end of Spencer Smith Park.

A classic photo-op that is drenched in Burlington history. The design of a plaque that will be installed on the Naval Walk commemorating a battle that was later seen as the turning point in the War of 1812. That stony stretch of beach in the background is where the Brant Inn was located. It was the jumpingest place in town in its day. People traveled from across Ontario and the United States by train t hear the great bands of the time.

The 50 square yard space was just drenched with history. Looking to the west is Burlington’s Bay, the entrance to one of the most industrial harbours in the country where tons of ore is brought in to fire the furnaces of the steel plants. A couple of yards from where an interpretive plaque that tells the story of a War of 1812 battle that took place out on that lake – out there in front of us is a stretch of stony beach that was once the location of the Brant Inn. It was a place that put Burlington on the map for many. In those days Burlington was a “jumping” town.

On this Saturday morning – exactly 200 years ago an event called the Burlington Races took place. The name come from a magazine article published 100 years ago that mis-represented what was happening with ships under full sail firing their cannons at each other was really all about.

It was a war that taught the Americans that Canada could perhaps be invaded but could not be conquered.

If the lakes were won said the better history books of the time, the war of 1812 was won. The British brought superior seamanship and better ships to the battle. The commanding officers of each fleet both held flag rank – Commodores both.

Burlington`s Mayor and the council member for the ward took part in the unveiling of a design that replicated the plaque that will eventually be put in place.

A great painting, full of dash and energy but the scene it depicts never took place. The artists didn’t know that when the work was done.

To commemorate the event and give it a level of legitimacy there were War of 1812 enactors on hand; Commodore Yeo of the British Navy and a British Royal Navy captain circa 1810 played by Gill Bibby.

Yeo was represented by Robert Williamson a Canadian Navy Commander who served as a Reserve officer, one time Commanding officer of HMCS Star in Hamilton. Williamson was a high school history and geography teacher.

Rick Wilson was the Burlington resident who used the research done by others to advocate for the removal of a plaque at the Burlington Heights in Hamilton which has been proven to be historically incorrect.

Robert Williamson was doing research on the Scourge and the Hamilton, simple merchant ships that were pressed into service for the American Navy just prior to the War of 1812. They went down in a gale and now lay at the bottom of Lake Ontario.

It was while doing this research on the Hamilton and the Scourge that Williamson accidently came across the existence of the log of HMS Wolfe which revealed facts that no one knew about. In is correspondence with Burlington Heritage Planner Jenna Paluto, Williamson set out the bigger picture:

“After the American naval victory on Lake Erie by Commodore Perry on September 10, 1813, a powerful United States fleet comprising ten ships under the command of Commodore Isaac Chauncey appeared off York (Toronto) on the morning of September 28, 1813. Their objective was to complete the American bid to gain control of the Great Lakes or at least create a diversion allowing the shipment of American troops from the Niagara frontier to the St. Lawrence River for an attack on Montreal.

“The smaller British fleet of six vessels, commanded by Commodore Sir James Yeo, was in the harbour but on the approach of the enemy, set sail to attack. After a sharp engagement the British flagship, HMS Wolfe, having suffered sail damage limiting her maneuverability, led the British squadron to a convenient anchorage in view of the present day City of Burlington. Commodore Yeo then had his squadron anchor close in shore with springs (heavy ropes) on the (anchor) cables allowing his ships to pivot and present powerful broadsides from a strong compact defensive unit that could not be enveloped from behind. The American fleet, having suffered battle damage as well, recognized the strong British position and withdrew to the protection of Fort Niagara, leaving the Royal Navy to quickly repair the sails and mast of their flagship, but still firmly in control of the lake.

“Control of Lake Ontario was essential to the British for the defense of Upper Canada (Ontario). By preserving a formidable presence on the lake, the British squadron was able to capture Fort Oswego in May 1814 and transferred General Drummond with 400 British reinforcements and supplies to the Niagara frontier in July to defeat the United States Army at Lundys Lane, the last invasion of Canada.”

It was that superb seamanship by a British naval officer off what Williamson believes was Bronte Creek that sent the Americans back to their home port.

Magazine writers who paid more attention to imaginative thinking than to historical fact

Williamson set out to correct the record which he did with a number of excellent papers.

Rick Wilson, the citizen who agitated and advocated for a correction to a grievous historical error.

Rick Wilson, a history buff, got hold of the information and began to agitate for a change that would correct the historical errors.

Wilson knocked on any door he could find – meeting with Burlington’s MP Mike Wallace who, while intrigued, had to back away because the plaques were a provincial responsibility. Wilson was able to get exactly nowhere with the office of Jane McKenna but he persevered and with the help of the Heritage Advisory Committee the city took on the task of creating a plaque.

Former economic development honcho suggest potential council candidates Stop, Look and Listen

October 2, 2013

By Don Baxter

BURLINGTON, ON. Hopefully Burlington Council members had a chance to recharge their batteries over the summer, and they are now fully engage with Burlington and Halton business. But at this point in a 4 year term, elected officials begin to think about whether they should run again. For those of us longer in the tooth and with more gray hair, this period is comparable to Pierre Trudeau’s infamous walk-in-the-snow. But our elected officials will thankfully have better weather for their walk. Perhaps they should walk out to the end of the pier, look out, see that we have a second pier, and think of Burlington from pier to shining pier. This takes vision – think of a tree-lined boardwalk running the entire length, full of residents, tourists, joggers, cyclists, hospital workers, and patients out for a pleasant walk. Do you have vision or is your eye sight too weak? And surely, you see past the bureaucratic response and understand the tourism and human value of leaving locks on the pier.

That’s my point – the vision thing. Burlington is experiencing its own version of a spring awakening – new community groups are forming, like my neighbourhood – the Roseland Community Organization, or the beach residents, Roseland Heights Community Association, St. Luke’s precinct, the airport, Burlington Green – to name a few. Why is this happening? In an established community, which Burlington is becoming, providing good leadership and good governance is complex – a kind of a Rubric’s Cube. It means citizens and community groups will become increasingly involved in every decision you make. If you do not have vision and a strong sense of community values then you will just be oiling the squeaky wheels – and in terms of dealing with change, this short-term approach will lead to a downward spiral for our community.

But a Council who temporarily closes a road to allow salamanders safe crossing, who doesn’t even entertain the idea of a casino operation, or who didn’t take the easy way out and abandon the Pier, cannot be considered weak. In these instances, there was and is a clear sense of the community values, and when leadership and vision blend, good decision-making follows.

Community values are more than individual property rights. Developers moving into a neighbourhood do not see the property they have purchased as a home but rather a business opportunity to be exploited. The precious qualities of an existing neighbourhood that have been built through good stewardship over time,conveniently add to profitability of the developers short-term business proposition. They may live in the home for tax avoidance or warranty reasons, but they do not have long-term perspective for building or adding to the sense of community. Rather, they only see short-term business prospects. Trees or heritage on your property are an asset as long as they do not get in the way of their building envelope or planned pool and Jacuzzi.

They do not see either trees or heritage, for example, as a community asset because they cannot accept long-term community values getting in the way of their construction schedule. Their quick solution clear-cut the trees or heritage house, go for your permit, make a lot construction noise and dust, and plant a few shrubs.

Getting back to my fundamental argument, a good Council recognizes and acts upon community values, not the business values of these pick-up truck companies cashing in on something they did not build. I hasten to add, Burlington has its share of great developers who are good community builders. They recognize the value of community, and you see their names on every wall of dedication where good deeds are done in Burlington.

Get my point? In the municipal environment, community values drive good government, not vested corporate interest. This sounds odd from a fellow who used to run economic development for both the City of Burlington and Metropolitan Toronto but my concepts for neighbourhood preservation are not anti-growth for the City, not at all. Direct corporate interests to where they belong – into intensification and commercial/industrial corridors. The risk proposition for developers who want to move into established neighbourhoods is going up quickly, and flash mobs may become regular features at Committee of Adjustment hearings for severances and variances.

The pier those without vision or imagination might want to walk out on.

So Councillors or prospective Councillors, when you take your walk to the end of the pier – STOP, LOOK, and LISTEN. If you don’t hear anything over the squeaky wheels and the vested interests demanding their property rights over community interests, extend your walk. But if you have vision and a sense of value for established communities, downtown and waterfront regeneration, a protected escarpment, strong arts and culture, tree canopy protection, design-intense development solutions, neighbourhood protection and ongoing infrastructure renewal, then stay put. You can probably run a balanced government responsive to citizens and communities, not just a wanna-be-business on behalf of taxpayers.

You don’t have to be loveable to be leaders in Burlington, just sensible, and clearly, not self-serving.

Bronte Creek in Lowville Park is a fish sanctuary – poaching is however taking place. Get you cell phone cameras out.

October 2, 2013

By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON There are Lowville residents who are very upset about what they understand to be illegal fishing in the Bronte Creek that runs through Lowville Park.

Salmon spawning started last week and it is reported that there are people fishing in the Creek

At least one person was seen walking from the creek early in the morning with bags of fish since this is the best run in years and people are just scooping them out of the water. The salmon are exhausted so it’s easy pickings.

Salmon swimming in Bronte Creek – fish run is very strong this year.

A valid Ontario Fishing License is required for those 18 years of age and over and Ontario Fishing regulations apply.

The Conservation Halton web site says:

Special regulations, including permanent sanctuaries, seasonal sanctuaries and extended fall seasons apply to various sections of the lower reaches of Bronte Creek.

But then say absolutely nothing about the specifics of the sanctuaries and what regulations apply.

Not very helpful.

However, the provincial Ministry of Natural Resources was much more forthcoming.

Bronte Creek – as it winds through Lowville Park in City of Burlington – is a fish sanctuary

No fishing allowed from Jan 1-Fri before 4th sat in April and from Oct 1-Dec 31.

Even if it wasn’t a sanctuary the season for trout and salmon closed almost everywhere on September 30.

The MNR Enforcement officers are aware the situation in Lowville and are looking into it.

To report a natural resources violation, call 1-877-TIPS-MNR (847-7667) toll-free any time or contact your local MNR office during regular business hours. You can also call Crime Stoppers anonymously at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477). If someone has photos of natural resource violation being committed they should mention that when they contact the TIPS line and keep the photos in case of further investigation. We discourage anyone from putting themselves at risk to get such photos.

Three alarm blaze on Michael – damage limited to garage and basement – no personal injury.

Three alarm blaze at Michael Street residence.

October 2, 2013

By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON. It didn’t look like a bad fire but it brought three trucks to the Michael Street residence Tuesday evening where the fire was limited to the garage area of a two-story home that had experienced a fire about ten years ago when it had a different owner.

There were no personal injuries.

The fire was persistent however and fire fighters kept applying water to an area.

Fire appeared to be limited to the garage area of the two storey house where fire fighters returned several times with hoses.

No report on the extent of the damage to the structure. Power was cut off but there did not appear to be any damage to the structure other than a lot of water that would have flown down to the basement.

Remember the Happy Gang? “We’re happy, we’re healthy – the heck with being wealthy.” Well we are certainly wealthy.

October 1, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. It wasn’t hard to figure out what the major message was behind the 2013 version of Burlington’s Vital Signs report is: there are many in the community who just don’t have enough – and it isn’t just the “poor” people that are going without.

The Burlington Community Foundation, around since 1999, released, along with 26 other communities across Canada, a report that touched all the usual bases and added in a significant push on the pressing needs for better access to mental health services.

The Vital Signs report is data driven and uses graphics very effectively to make the point. The cartoon cover page is Burlington: there’s the gazebo (I met my wife for the first time there) there’s Pepperwoods, there is Benny’s and the gas station. The drawings are all in colour and attractive in their own way. Cute – it isn’t until you get to the second page that the point is made. Well – compare the two versions and you know in an instant what the report wants to talk about.

The report is the second published by the Community Foundation. The 2013 report covers eleven key areas of focus, including physical and mental wellness, poverty, youth, and seniors.

“This year’s report again emphasizes that Burlington is a city of contrasts. We are a prosperous community, with higher than average levels of income and education, with remarkable environmental features such as our escarpment and waterfront. Yet, there are people struggling in our community, in ways that are often unseen, as we drive and walk through our neighbourhoods”, said Burlington Community Foundation (BCF) President and CEO, Colleen Mulholland.

Who are the people that collect all the data and tie the different strands that are woven into the tapestry that is our city?

Established in 1999 as a centre for philanthropy, Burlington Community Foundation is a local knowledge broker and one of the most reliable partners in the non-profit sector. They collaborate with donors to build endowments, give grants and connect leadership. Responsive to their donors, the grant making experts help people give, build legacies, address vital community needs and support areas of personal interest. The Foundation helps people, agencies and corporations improve the city’s vitality.

Cover: 2013 Vital Signs report commissioned by the Burlington Community Foundation.

Take away the good stuff, the nice stuff and the picture is that of a different Burlington – not one we all get to see.

The report argues that “connections are critical to community vitality” but how do you do that? You’ve heard it before and with a municipal election just over a year away you will hear it again from every one of the rascals running for office: – Burlington is ranked as the top mid-sized city in which to live in Canada.

We drive – everywhere, in part because local transit has yet to develop to the point where it serves the community as well as it is going to have to. Biggest reason – we like our cars.

And we drive our cars – to everything. 79% of Ontarian’s commute to work by car, truck or van. That number is 86% for Burlington where we have an excellent, frequent train service that has three stops in the city with plenty of parking – free.

We vote – in the last federal election 66.5 of us voted while the Ontario average was 61.5%. Didn’t do much for us in terms of the quality of our elected members though did it?

We have one of the best educated populations in the province.

We are a well-educated community – check out the charts.

Burlington is doing better at both the number of people with jobs and the number that are unemployed. But there are other indicators that reveal serious problems.

Our people are employed – they need to be – our housing is amongst the most expensive in the province and rental accommodation is not easy to come by.

Median household income levels are 24% higher in Burlington than the provincial average but according to Statistics Canada, almost 1 in 10 youth under 18 lived in a low-income household.

In 2012, 36% of all items circulated by Burlington public libraries were in the child or youth category. Attendance at children and youth programs at Burlington libraries was 35,195.

Overall, the age profile of Burlington is getting older and more so than the Ontario average – in 2011, there were 29,720 seniors 65 years of age or older living in Burlington, comprising 16.9% of the population vs. 14.6% in Ontario.

Young people in Burlington are preforming well in school compared to the Ontario average but there are some opportunities for improving the lives and outcomes for our youth, starting as early as kindergarten. Some issues we need to tackle as a community are obesity, bullying and mental health.

Burlington residents are better educated than the population of Ontario and Canada. 67% of Burlington adults 25 years of age and over have completed some form of post-secondary education, compared with 60% of the population of Ontario.

Among Burlingtonians 25–64 years of age, 95% have completed high school – this is a big positive change in a 10 year period: in 2001, 79% had completed high school.

In 2011, there were 143,510 people 15 years of age or older in Burlington. Within this age range, 93,030 people were employed and 5,755 were unemployed for a total labour force of 98,785.

Burlington has stronger employment statistics than Ontario as a whole. The employment rate among people 15–64 years of age was 65%, compared to 60% for Ontario. Burlington’s unemployment rate was 6%, compared to 8% for Ontario.

For the past 10 years, the rate of unemployment in Burlington has been consistently lower than elsewhere in Ontario and in other communities across Canada.

Here are some quick facts about jobs and businesses in Burlington, according to the Halton Region 2012 Employment Survey, released in June 2013:

The City of Burlington has 4,638 businesses providing 74,216 full and part-time jobs.

While Burlington accounts for 35% of the 15–64 year olds living in Halton Region, jobs in Burlington accounted for nearly 40% of Halton’s total employment.

Approximately 80% of jobs were in the service-based sector – the leading ones being the retail trade, professional, scientific and technical services, and health care and social assistance.

Can we blame the air quality problems on Hamilton?

Air quality good – but could be better

Burlington has good air quality, compared to downtown Hamilton. Hamilton has more poor to moderate air quality days (22%) than does Burlington (16%).

However, Burlington’s location in southern Ontario – in Canada’s manufacturing heartland and downwind from the industrial centre of the U.S. – increases the number of poor to moderate air quality days relative to more northern parts of Ontario and cities in other parts of Canada. For example, in each of Sudbury and Ottawa only 8% of the days in 2012 had poor to moderate air quality compared to 16% in Burlington.

Price increases are great if you own property – tough market to get into for first time buyers.

The average price of a home in Burlington in the first half of 2013 was $486,669 – up 7% from 2012.

Similar increases were seen in the neighbouring cities of Hamilton (+6%) and Oakville (+7%), with Burlington housing costs continuing to be intermediate between these two cities

Burlington’s rental market is tight – far too tight. The city thought it had a hope recently with close to 100 affordable units coming on line – but that one got away on us.

People looking to rent – particularly those with more modest incomes – can find it difficult to find affordable rental housing in Burlington. In fall 2012, Burlington’s rental vacancy rate was 1.3%. For reference, a vacancy rate of 3% is considered necessary for adequate competition and supply. By comparison, Hamilton’s vacancy rate was 4.2%, and in Ontario as a whole it was 2.5%.

In 2011, Halton had a higher percentage of households (4.6%) on waiting lists for affordable, rent geared-to-income housing than was the case for Ontario as whole (3.2%). Further, the demand for this housing greatly exceeds the supply, as only 0.5% of Halton households were living in affordable, rent- geared-to-income housing in 2011.

In Halton, between 2010 and 2011 there was a 47% increase in households waiting for rent-geared-to-income housing. Families with children are the hardest hit.

The kids think they are getting the exercise they need – caution, this is “self-reported” data.

Residents of Halton are more likely to rate their overall health as “very good” or “excellent” (72%) compared with Ontario residents as a whole (61%). Moreover, positive health ratings increased from 2011 (66%) to 2012 (72%).

Over 75,000 Burlington residents 18 years of age and older are overweight or obese based on their self-reported height and weight. That’s just over half of the adult population who have an increased risk of certain health problems, including Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, gallbladder disease, obstructive sleep apnea, and certain cancers.

Mental health is now at least being talked about – it isn’t something we hide the way we used to – that was an improvement for the better. Now we have to address the problem and it is not going to be cheap.

The Canadian Institute for Health Information tracks the performance of over 600 health care facilities across Canada on a variety of indicators of effectiveness of treatment, patient safety, appropriateness of treatment, and accessibility. JBH is either at or better than the Canadian average on all of the indicators.

Seniors need different services. The city currently has one Seniors’ Centre and at least five high schools. Will we need additional Seniors’ Centers that can be converted to high schools 30 years down the road? There are some significant problems to need solutions and we don’t have a lot of time to find the answers.

Canada’s age profile is getting older, and this trend will continue for several decades into the future. For example, the proportion of people 65+ years of age in Ontario is expected to grow from 14.6% of the population in 2011 to over 23% by the year 2036.

Burlington’s age profile has historically been older than that of Ontario as a whole, and the difference has been increasing over time. As of 2011, 16.9% of Burlington’s population was 65 years of age or older, compared to 14.6% of Ontario’s population.

Burlington has more of the Region’s senior population – do we have well thought out plans to meet their needs?

Based on Statistics Canada measures of low-income from the 2006 census, 5.6% of Burlington seniors have low-income after tax. However, the prevalence of low-income is particularly acute among female seniors in Burlington: this prevalence is higher than the Ontario average, and higher than other Halton region communities.

In 2006, about 1,800 senior households in Burlington spent 30% or more of their total household income before tax on mortgages, electricity, heat and municipal services. Of these, almost 500 spent 50% or more of their income on housing, which leaves very little money for food, medications, or other necessities.

In the Age-Friendly Communities Forum: A Seniors’ Perspective – an initiative of the Elder Services Advisory Council In Halton Region – the Burlington participants identified a need for affordable housing as one of the top 3 issues for seniors in Burlington, and noted that “some people are moving out of the community as they cannot afford to live here.”

We love the place.

Burlington residents tend to see the quality of life in the city as improving: 27% said the quality of life in Burlington has improved over the past two years, compared to only 11% who said it has declined.

Survey respondents were asked which factors had the greatest impact on quality of life in their city. What set Burlington residents apart particularly was the importance of a low crime rate, and a strong sense of community.

In a survey of Burlington residents, 76% said culture is “essential” or “highly important” in their daily lives. There are many types of cultural experiences. For Burlington residents, the top 6 are festivals (86%), museum & local history (81%), art galleries (78%), going to the theatre (75%), public art (69%) and family heritage & traditions (69%).

Benefits to Burlington from community cultural organizations include:

624,000+ visits to local festivals, events, productions and exhibitions

89,000+ hours of cultural programming offered to all ages

Burlington residents spend 37% of their cultural time in Burlington, and the remaining time in other cities such as Toronto and Hamilton.

These numbers are the reality for many. A person cannot live on the minimum wage – it has to be close to doubled – and that’s not something a municipality can do.

Ontario has a legally mandated minimum wage of $10.25 an hour. However, a person working full-time at the minimum wage rate will be living in poverty, as they will earn less than Statistics Canada’s Low Income Cut-off.

The concept of a “living wage” is motivated by the following question: What does a family working full-time (37.5 hours a week, year-round) need to earn in order to pay for the necessities of life, to enjoy a decent quality of life, and to be able to participate fully in the economic, political, social and cultural life of the community?

The answer to this question depends on family composition and on where you live. Community Development Halton has tackled this question for the Halton Region, including Burlington.

What is included in a living wage, and what is excluded? “A living wage isn’t extravagant. It doesn’t allow families to save for retirement, to save for their children’s education or to service their debt. But it does reflect the cost of affording the basics of life – something the minimum wage doesn’t do,” states the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

Community Development Halton considered three types of Halton households: a family of 4 (two parents, two children – a boy age 10, and a girl age 14), a single-parent family (mother age 30 and a boy age 3), and a single person (male age 32). In each household, each adult is working full- time, year-round. The calculation of living wage reflects the typical costs in Halton, as well as taxes and benefits.

The number of youth have grown since 2006 but the senior population has grown more.

The number of youth in Burlington has increased since 2006, but at a slower rate than older age groups. As a result, the overall age profile of Burlington is getting older.

Burlington is an affluent community, but not everyone is well off. In the 2006 census, 7% of all residents lived in low income households. However, this was greater for youth under 18, where 9% – almost one in 10 youth – lived in a low income household.

This is what students have said they did in terms of getting the physical education they need for balanced growth.

According to the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology, youth 12–17 years of age require at least 60-minutes of moderate to vigorous intensity activity per day.

In the Halton Youth Survey, two–thirds of Burlington Grade 7s claimed to meet the 60-minute-per-day guideline, but only just over half of Grade 10s claimed to meet the guideline.

Girls in the Halton region were much less likely than boys to report meeting the physical activity guideline, with only four in ten Grade 10 girls meeting the guideline.

This is not a healthy number. Why in a community where genuine financial need is not pervasive?

The Halton Youth Survey, conducted by the Halton Our Kids Network, developed an indicator of involvement in criminal activity based on four self- report questions asking about vandalism, carrying a weapon, selling drugs, and group or gang involvement, and these define what is meant here by “criminal activity”. Note that because this is based on self-report, it includes not only youth accused of crime but also youth who “got away with it”.

Our girls are at very serious risk: do we understand why and do we have programs to help them deal with the depression they are experiencing?

One in five people in Ontario experiences a mental health problem or illness. Because mental illness can affect people in all walks of life, this is as important an issue in comparatively affluent communities like Burlington as it is in other less affluent communities. When you take into account family members and friends, almost everyone is affected in some way.

Mental illness affects people at all life-stages. However, one of the most significant characteristics of the onset of mental health problems is that, unlike many other illnesses, they are more likely to first emerge and affect people early in their lives.

According to a Mental Health Commission of Canada report, the potential negative effects of mental illness on the lives and prospects of young people are considerable:

“Mental disorders are the most common medical conditions causing disability in young people. Most mental disorders begin before age twenty- five and tend to be chronic, with substantial negative short and long-term outcomes. They are associated with poor academic and occupational success, economic burden, personal, interpersonal and family difficulties, increased risk for many physical illnesses and shorter life expectancy.”

Early detection and treatment of mental health problems is vital for the young people in our community and for the future health of our city.

Access to youth mental health services is not what it needs to be

Only one-third of those who need mental health services in Canada actually receive them.

71% of family physicians ranked access to psychiatrists in Ontario as fair to poor.

While mental illnesses constitute more than 15% of the burden of disease in Canada, these illnesses receive only 5.5% of health care dollars.

ROCK reports that due to mental health funding gaps, as of March 2013, youth and families were waiting for just over 1,000 various services they offer. Wait times for these services range from months up to 2 years.

Suicide is the second leading cause of death among young people in Canada. One of the most important causes of youth suicide is mental illness – most often depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and substance abuse.

The effects of youth suicide go beyond the deceased, impacting those who survive their death – their parents, friends, peers, and communities.

Do our students feel their schools are safe?

A survey conducted by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health found that in response to the question, “In the last 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?”, 7% of Ontario Grade 7s and 12% of Grade 12s answered “yes.”

The Halton Youth Survey asked a somewhat different version of the question, focusing on teens who “sometimes, often or always” had thoughts of suicide in the past 12 months. While the question is somewhat different the results are similar: one in twenty (5%) Grade 7s in Burlington had thoughts about suicide in the past 12 months, increasing to over one in ten (13%) by Grade 10.

Depression is a mood disorder characterized by intense negative emotions and feelings, that negatively impact on people’s lives leading to social, educational, personal and family difficulties.

The Halton Youth Survey created an indicator of being at risk for depression, based on a person saying they “always” or “often” had experienced the following four emotional states in the past week: feeling sad, lonely, depressed, or like crying.

The percentage of Burlington students at risk for depression increases from Grade 7 to Grade 10, and by Grade 10, one in 10 teens are at risk for depression.

This increase in risk for depression from Grade 7 to Grade 10 is occurring primarily among girls. By Grade 10, one in seven girls is at risk for depression.

In the qualitative research project, Halton Youth Voice Road Show (2011), participants suggested the following causes for depression in youth:

Being bullied, which was seen to lead not only to depression but also suicide

Different social groups within a school bullying one another

The fact that sometimes youth were just mean to each other

Technology, since youth don’t actually need to connect to each other on a personal level any more

Images and expectations portrayed in the media

The pursuit of material possessions, with participants saying that it would be better if youth just spent time hanging out instead of shopping

Stress

Not having friends

Being pressured to do drugs

Youth mental health trends at Joseph Brant Hospital

Trips to the hospital emergency department because of a mental health issue represent the tip of the iceberg for youth mental health and substance abuse issues in Burlington. Emergency department visits can occur when mental health or substance abuse issues are undiagnosed, or are untreated, or treatment is not working. Youth visits to the JBH emergency department because of mental health or substance abuse problems show:

Emergency department visits for mental health or substance abuse issues spikes upwards for youth 18–24 years of age.

The annual number of youth under 25 years of age going to JBH emergency because of mental health or substance abuse issues has increased 30% over the last 3 years.

The rate of increase has been even higher among the subset of youth under 18 years of age – showing an increase in emergency visits of 43% over the past 3 years.

JBH operates the Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Consultation Clinic, which provides support to children/youth under the age of 18 years. The case load for the Clinic increased by 16% from 2010–11 to 2011–12, and the average wait time for assessment increased by 31%, to 47 days.

The Community Foundation serves us all well – now the community has to look at the data, talk about it and figure out where we can shore up the weak spots and ensure that we continue to do what we have done well.

Collen Mulholland plans to hold a Roundtable on Mental Health early in 2014. How about ensuring that every grade 10 student in the Board of Education’s high schools be given a copy and make it the focus of a civics class.

Parts of King Road closed for 8 weeks while last phase of grade separation is done; fish are using the aqueduct built for them.

September 30^th, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON Santa Claus just might be able to get to some of the homes in Aldershot if he wants to use the King Road grade separation. The tunnel underneath the railway tracks was pushed through last thanksgiving – a task that was seen as a major engineering feat when it was done. Getting a creek re-routed and set up so that it would run over the underpass – as an aqueduct – is now operational. All that’s left to get done is for the road underneath the railway tracks to be built and King Road re-aligned. THAT is going to take eight weeks.

That road, King Road, to the right of the tunnel will soon be gone forever and you will actually be able to drive beneath those railway tracks.

The grade separation project is in what city hall calls the final phase that will see total completion anticipated for June 2014

What the city calls the FINAL road closure starts October 15th at 10am, lasting for 8 weeks, to facilitate the move of the road through the underpass. The October road closure will have pedestrian access maintained. At the completion of the road closure you will be able to drive under the railway tracks. Expect to see every politician in the Region and perhaps even the Premier, who seems to like Burlington, either peddling bicycles under the railway tracks in a flotilla of convertible cars driving through the newly paved road. And I suppose the Burlington Teen Tour Band will be out with the flags flying.

The project seems to be talking forever – heck they shut down the rail line LAST Thanksgiving and dug the tunnel under the railway line in three days – so someone knew what a day’s work was.

It was a mammoth project, seen as a major engineering feat by many and the core work got done over a three day weekend almost a year ago. Progress has been slow since then – expected to open before Christmas.

The reconstruction of King Road from Plains Road to south of Highway 403 has also been completed, with the exception of the road at the tracks, which will be relocated to the underpass during the October road closure.

The opening up of the King Road underpass has the potential to draw significant commercial development. King Road before the work on the underpass began.

The North section is now paved with traffic markings, and has had sidewalks and curbs installed. The creek is now flowing through the channel and over the creek bridge.

The overall scope of work to construct the road through the underpass is to add the asphalt and granular road bases and place concrete curb & gutter and sidewalks within the roadway underpass.

FULL road closures will be in place from October 15, for 8 weeks. King Road will signed as closed, local access for businesses and residents will be maintained. This closure is intended to reduce through traffic.

Access to home and business during normal construction hours (Monday to Friday, 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.) may at times be difficult. Additionally, driveways will be temporarily closed when work is being carried out in the immediate vicinity. Either the inspector or the contractor will notify you of access interruptions prior to the closure.

For day-to-day construction inquiries: Jason Forde at 905-335-7600 ext. 7421

When the work is completed will the city see the development of new business opportunities on the northern part of King Road where there is a considerable amount of prime commercial land on the west side?

Will there be some additions to the commercial business on King Road south of the railway crossing? The whole purpose of the grade separation was to limit the number of times traffic was halted due to rail traffic. The GO train increase in their schedule to half hour service would have made it all but impossible to rely on that Road for transportation to the numerous businesses north of the rail crossing.

Aldershot now has a road with no stoppage due to rail traffic. Will that result in business development? The city could certainly use the tax revenue that comes from the commercial sector.

Transparency and the free flow of information, searching for what you want at city hall: why is the search box gone?

September 30, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. Where is the search tool on the city’s web site?

There are loads of data at city hall but if you don’t know exactly what it is you are looking for you could be out of luck. There used to be a search box you could type words into and various documents would come up. It wasn’t a particularly fine tune search tool but it did at least let you get in and rummage around

Can you see a search box on the HOME page of the city’s web site? There used to be one. What happened?

That search feature wasn’t in place early on the morning of September 30, 2013.

Did someone lose it or is the upgrade of the way the city is going to provide information at the point where it got taken out for a short period of time?

Or has the city decided to take away that feature?

Torontonian arrested in Burlington for human trafficking and procuring for the purposes of prostitution.

September 27, 2013

By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON. Halton Regional Police responded to an assault call at a Motel in the City of Burlington where a female victim reported to police that she had been assaulted by a Brondon Curtis HENRY (28 years of age). The victim suffered minor injuries to her face, for which she received medical treatment.

Further investigation revealed that HENRY had been forcing the victim to provide sexual services (prostitution) for which he was financially benefiting.

Brandon Curtis HENRY a Toronto resident has been charged with the following criminal offences:

Assault (two counts)

Human Trafficking

Benefiting From Trafficking a Person

Exploitation For The Purpose of Trafficking a Person

Procuring To Become a Prostitute

HENRY was held for a bail hearing and will appear in court on September 28th 2013 in the City of Hamilton.

Thursday was not a good day for Beachway Park residents. Major battle ahead keeping homes in the park.

September 27^th, 2013

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON. Thursday was not a good day for the residents in the Beachway Park. The Regions Waterfront Beachway Park Advisory Committee that is made up of regional Councillors and citizens met and supported a decision to buy up every house they can and demolish them for park space. If there was an upside to their decision it was that any buying would be done on a willing buyer, willing seller basis – which means no expropriation.

The Regional Advisory Committee is reported to have vote 9-3 for the recommendations with Councillor Sharman one of the three that voted against the recommendation. The two Burlington citizen members of the Advisory Committee are not identified on the Region’s web site. Councillor Craven voted for the recommendation.

The recommendation was for the Advisory Committee to support the long-term strategic vision for the acquisition of all private property in the park.

The difficulty with this recommendation is that when Burlington was debating this issue it couldn’t find any record of a long-term vision. There were certainly studies in the files, some that go back as far as the mid 80’s but nothing in the way of a policy statement saying all the homes were to be bought should they become available.

A Regional Comprehensive Report identified two clusters of homes in the Beachway Park – some want every one of them bull-dozed into the ground and make available for parking spaces. The housing clusters in place now are shown in red.

While the report from the Advisory is just a recommendation it is nevertheless significant. Many feel it is an indication of the direction the Regional Council is likely to go when it comes to a final decision.

The Advisory recommendation will go to the Regional Committee that handles this file. They will vote on the matter and send their decision along to Regional Council where a final decision gets made.

Recently Conservation Halton, which is responsible for the environmental aspects of the park chose not to recommend that any land be bought. While the decision at Conservation Halton was a tie vote – and therefore is seen as lost.

The Region’s Planning Department recently published a Comprehensive Report which didn’t get much in the way of positive reaction from anyone in Burlington and was seen as a somewhat biased document that chose to highlight issues the Region saw as important but ignore for the most part the local issues and the value of community in a park setting.

The Region’s report covered flooding issues in a way that was significantly different from the recollection of people who lived in the Beachway when the flooding took place. Houses were said to be at significant risk while the water sewage treatment plant which has floors beneath the land surface was not said to be at risk.

Quite why some level of government did not ask that the report be retracted was a surprise to some people.

Gary Scobie, far right, was a member of the Waterfront Access and Protection Advisory Committee which was sunset by the city last December. Scobie went on to sit on the Ad Hoc Waterfront Committee.

Gary Scobie, A Burlington resident, chose to delegate at the Advisory meeting – the only person to do so, said: “You have heard from us before and I believe you know that we support the continued existence and enhancement of the Burlington Beach residential community. We do this because we’ve studied the issue, as citizens from each ward with no financial ties to the beach area, and weighed the costs to buy out and destroy a historic community against the benefit of gaining a small amount of land to be added to the park.”

Scobie continued: “We find the case for community destruction wanting, especially because the community poses no harm to the public use of the park beach, shoreline habitat or walking path. In fact, we see the residents as unpaid custodians of the park, looking after people who need help and watching out for vandalism. Our survey completed by nearly 450 Burlington residents from all wards.”

Scobie who is a member of the Waterfront Advisory Committee, an Ad Hoc group that was formed when Burlington’s city council sunset the Advisory Committee it had.

The residents are very vocal – they think the Burlington policy is a serious mistake. They somehow have to get their voice heard at the Regional level – with the voice from the city is pretty weak.

The residents with homes in Beachway Park have a fight on their hands and they are going to have to lobby hard to get their argument in front of the members of Regional Council. It is not an impossible task and it would certainly help if the support from their city council were a little stronger.

The family in this home does not expect to be a willing seller to anyone. The city and the Region, especially the current city Councillor for the ward thinks the city and the Region can just wait them out. Lousy way to run a city.

The real hope for the community is that any property sold is to be on a willing buyer, willing seller basis, and all the residents have to do is just not sell.

There has been some chatter amongst Beachway residents about a possible class action law suit against the city and the Region for the damages suffered by the property owners over the loses they have incurred due to municipal and regional government policies that artificially depressed property prices.

Wouldn’t that be a cock fight?

Police report “minor injury” on male found on Walkers Line was “sustained during a medical event”. Case closed?

September 27, 2013

By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON. There is nothing faster or more substantive than social media or a news source that uses the internet.

The Burlington Gazette picked up a news release from Halton Regional Police that reported a man found on Walkers Line who appeared to be seriously disoriented and injured. The individual was taken to Joseph Brant Hospital.

Are these the kind of injury that result from minor medical event?

A photograph was provided which we published. The news story was added to our Facebook page – and then it just took off. Thousand of people saw the news story and passed it on.

By mid afternoon the police had identified the individual and reported their “investigation revealed he sustained minor injury during a medical event and there is no foul play suspected.” The name of the victim was not being released.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Burlington uses three types of access: The Waterfront Trail, Windows on the Lake and small Parkettes.

Option #3 would dispose of the Water Street land and still develop the Windows-on-the-Lake on the East and West sides of the site where the city owns the road allowance.

Staff recommended Option # 2: preserving the land for future use. They justified their decision based on Regional and city official policy and the Waterfront Trail policy.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: