 By Pepper Parr
November 16th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
We are at a point in Burlington when a developer can have tonnes of abuse heaped upon them when they bring forward a project that many do not like.
Developers have to work within a set of rules and it is the job of the Planning department to ensure that the rules are adhered to.
 The planning advisor, Robert Glover, the planning consultant, Ed Fothergill and the building executive Mark Bales before a public meeting at which the citizens got their first look at the 421 Brant project that has been approved by city council. When all the studies have been completed, when the staff within the Planning department have had their internal discussions a report is written and sent to a city Council Standing committee where there is extensive debate – often lasting hours.
It is interesting to note that during the Standing Committee debate there was just the one public delegation.
One also has to note that at that particular Standing Committee, James Ridge, the city manager inserted himself into the debate with comments that are seldom heard from a city manager. Planning issues are the domain of the Director of Planning.
There is a segment of the Burlington population that does not like what it sees happening to the downtown core of the city.
Developers bring a project to a city Planning department; a report is prepared by people with designations that qualify them to make planning decisions.
That report gets debated by a city council, the people the citizens of the city elect. The current city council was elected in 2010 and every one of them re-elected in 2014. That is the democratic process we have and depend on.
 Nick Carnicelli, centre, takes photographs of a city planning department presentation of his 421 Brant Street development There is nothing corrupt about city council, they are not “in the pockets of the developers”.
With very few exceptions every home in this city was built by a developer that had to get a project through the planning process and then approved by the city council that was fairly elected.
Why we feel we have to beat up on as developer who followed all the rules is difficult to understand.
Nick Carnicelli, president of Carriage Gate, was the last delegator at the city council meeting last Monday. Here is what he had to say:
We are very proud of our project and the design excellence that it brings to the Downtown. A new building that enhances the streetscape and pedestrian experience while at the same time building on and enhancing important elements in the Downtown is very exciting.
We have assembled a team, including many pre-eminent planning, design and technical professionals. With their assistance, we have ensured that our project is comprehensively planned to address all relevant planning issues – it may well be the most comprehensively planned application that the City has ever received and builds on and enhances the most significant elements of the Downtown.
Our application has been reviewed within an emerging statutory framework for the Downtown based on the City’s Strategic Plan and will bring not only much needed housing to the Downtown BUT also new contemporary and usable retail and office space
In response to a rigorous review and scrutiny of the application by the City of Burlington, the Region of Halton and several other commenting agencies, many significant revisions have been made, with special attention being given to how people and land uses relate and work together at ground level and City-building initiatives:
The magnitude of the overall development has been reduced by approximately 25%. This has been accomplished by a number of changes related to not only the height of the building but also the size of the floor plate of the tower, the amount of the site that could be developed at-grade and revisions to the design of the building.
The entire building is pulled back from the property lines on all three sides – both the podium and the top to establish view corridors that do not exist today to frame City Hall, Civic Square and the Cenotaph. This has resulted in the buildable area of the site being reduced by 20% yet opportunities are provided for enhanced street-scaping, patios, tree planting, street furniture, paving materials and lighting to reinforce how special this site really is.
The lower podium adjacent to Brant and James has been cut back to provide view corridors – The original view corridor at the corner of Brant and James was 5 X 5 metres. It has been expanded to 16 X 16 square metres. This increases the size of the view corridor by over 500%.
The expanded view corridor in conjunction with wider sidewalks has resulted in a reduction in the amount of retail space – 17% not 30% as inadvertently noted by City staff. The benefits of the widened sidewalks, enhanced street-scaping, the view corridors and the construction of new contemporary retail space far outweighs the benefits of retaining a notional amount of outdated, obsolete and undesirable retail space.
The top floors of the building are pulled back even further and the height has been reduced by over 12.5 m. – 4 storeys
Tower floorplate has been reduced from 800 sq. m. to conform to the City’s Tall Building Guidelines and provide a slender tower.
The area of the proposed tower is well over 25% smaller than those that exist at adjacent buildings. In comparison, 478 Pearl Street built over 40 years ago is an 18 storey building with a floorplate of over 960 sq.
n. This is the equivalent of a 23 storey building built to current standards.
 Nick Carnicelli We are proposing to contribute to the easterly expansion Civic Square which has been presented as a significant City-building initiative.
Opportunities for public art are provided.
All of these changes recognize the importance of this site and its role within the evolving urban fabric of the Downtown. The City has never seen anything like this!
What Carnicelli didn’t say was that Carriage Gate began assembling property for this project ten years ago and that they at one point took a proposal to the Planning that met the 12 storey limit many people want.
It was a pretty plain looking building that used every possible foot of the property – not much in the way of a street-scape – but it met the rules.
The developer and the Planning department worked together to come up with the structure that met the new tall building guide lines that were new and the developer revised the proposal.
City council decided it was what the city needed and with two exceptions, the Mayor and the ward Councillor , voted for it.
Why are we beating up the developer?
Related news story:
Planning consultant explains the kind of growth Brant Street could see – become the spine of the city.
 By Staff
November 17th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The developers are seeing the opportunities and are picking up bits and pieces of property just outside the downtown core.
The three homes that also serve as business premises on the south west corner of James and Martha, the ROCK Centre is just across the road, have reportedly been sold the Mattamy interests.
 The three houses in the lower left hand corner are reported to have been sold. The council member for the ward, ward 2, lives further north on Martha.
The Mattamy people built a large part of the Palmer Drive part of Burlington. They promote themselves as Canada’s Top Home Builder · Over 90,000 Homes Built ·
No word on just what Mattamy intends to build – just that at least one of the business operations will be out of their space by the end of December.
 By James Young
November 15th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
In November of 2016 Jim Young said to city council during a debate on the amount of time a citizen would have to delegate that: “Sometimes it may seem as if we delegates are the enemy of the process. That we somehow stand in the way of the great works and plans you all have in mind for the city.
“The democratic processes of our city demand that qualified, talented professionals like the city staffs and managers, we are fortunate to have in Burlington, apply themselves to a certain vision of the city.
“That they nurse that vision through the often tortuous process to council for approval and implementation, only to have someone like me, a citizens delegate, put a flea in council’s ear, a spoke in staff’s well-oiled wheel and force a review all of their efforts and the inevitable delay that brings.”
Jim comments on the most recent meeting of city council.
On Monday night Burlington City Council, ignoring the more than 1400 signatures on a petition and the 13 delegations opposed to it, voted to break their own rules governing downtown development and allow the development of a 23 story building in contravention of their own 12 Story bylaw. (Only one delegate, the developer, spoke in favour of the project.)
This was a sad display of council voting against the vast majority of citizen opinion, a rejection of local voices made even sadder by the fact that compromise may have been possible. Instead entrenched positions and a degree of “Not in My Wardism” were allowed to carry the day.
 Jim Young delegating before city council. We all know and understand that council cannot be swayed by every nuance of public opinion, we elect them to lead and expect them to do so, but in this instance the opposition was so overwhelming and the possibility of compromise so obvious that the wisdom of the five Councillors who voted for the amendment, in a the year before an election, must be seriously questioned.
Why, for instance, could the developer not have settled on 15 or 17 floors, there would still be ample profit in this, it would still meet intensification targets and be much less intrusive on the character of the area?
Why was there no offsetting land allocation for park or green space? Why does council not hold the developer responsible for affordability units in the development? (Only vague and non-binding considerations on affordability are embodied in the proposal)
While sensible intensification and increased density are supported by all of council, city staff and the majority of citizen opinion, last night’s decision to allow a development so far removed from the official plan, existing bylaws and any sense of building proportion, may well prove to be a tipping point in the eventual destruction of Brant street as we know it. Other developers have already snapped up adjoining properties and now have the green light on non-complying developments.
Ironically, the idea of downtown walk-ability and community vibrancy that the downtown plan seeks are the very things that will be destroyed by developments like this as the floodgates open and they become the new downtown.
On Monday night, there was palpable feeling that there may have been a settling of old scores between some members of council and ward 2’s Councillor Meed Ward. It would be a sad day indeed if decisions of this importance are based on past enmities. Hopefully, electors will such behaviour accountable in next year’s civic election.
 Jim Young as he thinks through a point he is making at a transit meeting. On the subject of elections, if I may be so bold as to offer Councillor Dennison some advice: Questioning the integrity of a well-intended citizen petition is just not smart politics. Even if a few of the more than 1400 signatures were not fully vetted, disparaging the integrity of the signatories as well as insulting a lot of citizens, ward constituents and voters, is hardly the way to encourage civic engagement by well-meaning citizens. If a few signatures were disqualified would 1399 have swayed you?
Mayor Goldring had to remind the gallery of the rules of decorum at the groans which accompanied one Councillor’s suggestion that this would not set a precedent for future downtown development, (by Wednesday, one more developer had requested approval to add two more stories to a proposed building at Locust and Elgin Streets) or that council’s rejection of citizen input is a template for future engagement.
While he insisted, we will listen in future and staff will listen in future. The groans from the gallery suggested: “Then why are you not listening now?”
Burlington City Council loves to parade their national and international honours and laurels for civic engagement. They now have to learn that when you talk the self-congratulatory talk you must also walk that walk!
When you ask citizens to come together, ask for their input, then, when they do, you overwhelmingly reject them, you can no longer claim that high ground on civic engagement.
You either listen to your voters and compromise or they will assume their voices are only heard at election time with all the future electoral consequences that entails.
 By Staff
November 16th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
How many people have seen the man trudging along Guelph Line between Palmer Drive and Mainway carrying a sign and wearing a costume?
Who is he – why does he do this?
 Captain Crazy Pants – selling an oil change service. He is Captain Crazy Pants, a performer who walks for 40 hours a week and is paid by Pro Oil Change, a company in the business of changing the oil in your car.
He doesn’t identify himself but they eyes behind the mask are those of a younger man who speaks well and is committed to what he does.
40 hours a week – walking up and down a busy street is commitment.
They are tucked in behind the Husky gas station on Mt Forest and while they have a sign it is hard to see from Guelph Line – so Captain Crazy Pants trudges up and down Guelph Line wearing the sign that promotes the location.
 The oil changing bays are tucked in behind all the trees. A couple of blocks south there is a national oil change franchise beside a different gas station. Competition at its best. The little guy gets innovate and holds his share of the market. He says the work he does keeps his boss in business,
When not “walking the line” Captain Crazy Pants has done impersonations of Captain America, Spiderman and Batman.
 By Staff
November 15th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
If you were a TD Bank customer and your company used wire transfers to move funds – the message set out below might be one that you would look into by click on the pdf document that was attached.
You would pay dearly for that mistake.
At TD Commercial Banking, we are committed to helping you move your business forward.
To efficiently process incoming funds via wire transfer to your TD account(s), you must review the document attached so we can process it for you.
All incoming wire transfers will be debited $17.50. Other fees may be applied by the issuing financial institution and intermediary banks.
TD is committed to your business
Trust your business banking with TD
Don’t believe a word of it – if your bank want to communicate with you – they will not do it with an email message.
 By Pepper Parr
November 15, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The decision has been made.
 The condominium that is to be built on the corner of Brant and James Street is to rise up to 23 storeys.
How many parking spaces, the number of elevators, how many, if any, affordable units – all that will get worked out in the months and weeks ahead.
We now know that the land assembly of the block to the south is all but complete – just the jewellery store to be acquired.
What we heard however is that the block to the south – the one that was once the Elizabeth Interiors operation – is going to be limited to 17 stories – a limit that is set out in the Downtown Core Mobility Hub that isn’t cast in stone yet.
That could be both a mistake and a missed opportunity.
We have yet to hear much in the way of negative comment on city hall as a structure. It gets referred to as “iconic” and the city planner likes the building.
Given that we are going to have high rise buildings can we not make the best of it. If the city hall is really “iconic” (I’ve yet to be convinced) then feature it.
While Burlingtonians hate Toronto being made a reference point – bear with me.
When you drive up University Avenue from Front Street and approach Adelaide there are two towers (Toronto type towers) on either side of the street. Both are Sun Life Assurance buildings meant to frame University as you go north.
 Set aside that the two buildings on either side of University Avenue in Toronto loom over the street – it’s Toronto. Note the way they frame the street. The photograph we have dropped in isn’t all that good but it makes the point. It is possible to have buildings in place that serve as a frame to what lies beyond.
Now come back to Burlington and place yourself on James Street a block or two along the street and look towards city hall.
 James Street looking west to Brant Street. The current Carriage Gate building, on the right in the photograph, which is going to be turned into a 23 story tower. That is a done deal.
The property on the left, now the vacated Elizabeth Interiors store will fall within the rules that are going to govern the development limits for the Downtown Mobility Hub.
There is an opportunity here.
Someone with initiative and a desire to see something significant come out of the decision that has been made could pick up an idea like this and make a difference.
Why not work with Carriage Gate and Revenue Properties (the people who are assembling the block south of Brant and James) and build a better city.
Look for a design that is as close as possible to identical in design and have them rise to the same height. Same set back from the side walk; same trees, same patio set up, same sidewalk furniture.
The public art set outside each building would complement each other.
That is something that people could be proud of and perhaps change the way downtowners look upon their city. For those who need the quaint and historical the Queen’s Head and the old Russel Hotel will still be there.
Can the 421 project be more than just the first high rise tower in the downtown core?
Look at the Sun life building on University.
All this assumes that those opposed to the Carriage Gate building don’t take their beef to the OMB.
By Pepper Parr
November 15, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Well – we now know that there are going to be high rise – 23 floors plus – in the downtown core. That got decided at a defining city council meeting on Monday evening.
Ten years from now the city will look a lot different.
There is one development issue that could be even more critical to the development of the city, the look and feel of the downtown core.
 The Waterfront Hotel as we know it today is on the left – the red patch of excavation on the right is where the Bridgewater is being built. The city planners are currently working their way through a study of the re-development of the Waterfront Hotel property.
When the owner of the Waterfront hotel, Darko Vranich let the city know that he wanted to increase the density and add some height to the land there was an agreement struck that the city would hire people to come up with some design ideas. Three teams of designer/thinkers were to be assembled; two would work with the city – a third would work with the developer. And the developer would pay for all three studies.
A group of citizens have decided they are going to insert themselves into the process in a significant way. Several of the group live in the Lakeshore condos and they don’t want to see their part of the city go to the dogs.
No petitions from these people. They are hard core and they have done their homework and are putting ideas on the table.
The starting point.
 The site that is being re-developed is shown in dark blue – with a rendering of what the Bridgewater development will look like relative to the Waterfront Hotel. The city has taken the public through an intensive community engagement process – all the meetings took place in the downtown area – what the people in Headon, the Orchard, Palmer and Alton think about what happens to the Waterfront Hotel property isn’t being recorded.
After a number of sessions where ideas were set out as sketched and then produced as rough models and made public.
The process started with three possible designs put forward: Two came from the city planning department and a third from the developer.
The Plan B people were not impressed – they came out with an idea of their own while the city produced what they called an “emerging concept”.
Let’s see what these all look like.
The early design concepts:
 This is the first concept that came out of the Planning department. It shifts the focal point of the site from Brant Street to John Street.
 This is the second concept that came out of the Planning department. It keeps Brant Street as the main road into the property but moves the towers to the eastern side of the property. Twenty and 30 floors was a surprise.
 This is the design that was submitted by the property owner. It uses John Street as the entrance to the eastern end of Spencer Smith Park. The massing is to the east and west of the property. The suggestion that 40 storeys was acceptable has made many people gulp. What the Planning department made of the three concepts.
 The Planning department took the three concepts and what they liked from all the designs that came out of the community workshops and have given the public what is being called Planning Department’s Emerging Preferred Concept. The concept doesn’t suggest any building heights. The concept does make both Brant and John Street entrances. to the Park. Not so fast say the Plan B people – more public space please and lower your sights on the height while you are at it.
 The Plan B people saw it all quite a bit differently. They wanted far more space at the foot of Brant street and have the Pier show cased . All this goes to a city meeting on November 28th.
There is an opportunity to do something spectacular – but it is going to take a city council that decides not to make the mistake made in 1995 when what is now the Bridgewater development decision was made.
What is interesting is the way many of the Waterfront Hotel re-development designs snuggle up to what is going to be the Marriott Hotel and the seven story condo at the foot of Elizabeth Street.
There are a lot of people who want to keep the quiet quaint feel of the downtown core. There isn’t going to be anything quaint about the waterfront five to six years from now. It could end up being very smart looking, swift, hip and cool. But getting to that point will be a painful process.
Related new stories:
Part 1 of a multi part series.
 By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Ward 3 Councillor John Taylor was Ok with a 23 storey tower opposite city hall. His focus was on saving the waterfront view.
He called it the view the jewel of the city.
“The lake is the prize” he said, “we have to protect that view.”
 What a view. Councillor Taylor, along with the other members of Council except Meed Ward, voted to sell it to private interests. Taylor needs to be reminded of the position he took in 2015 when he voted to sell lakeside land to property owners whose homes abutted land the city owned.
There were several small parcels of land owned by the city and the provincial government.
A staff report on what was to be done with property that was referred to as “windows to the lake”.
The Staff report set out three choices: Do nothing, lease the land or sell it.
 The graphic tells the story. The city owned the land inside the red boundary line. Three property owners had land that abutted the city property. The city sold the land they owned for peanuts. Taylor voted for the sale of that “prize”. Residents whose property abutted the land saw an opportunity and moved quickly to make an offer. The succeeded in convincing the city to sell them the land and today those property owners have a superb view over the lake and no longer have to put up with the public walking past the edge of their property.
 Councillor Taylor – protecting those waterfront views. During that debate Councillor Taylor grumbled about creating new parkland saying that there was a public park less than a block away. And indeed there was a public park – Port Nelson Park – a small patch of land that has a very good view of the lake.
Taylor said at the time that the public didn’t need anymore parkland in that part of the city.
Taylor was quite right – the “lake is the prize” – then why did he go along with selling lakefront property to private interests in 2015?
We will never know – and that magnificent stretch of land will never be in the hands of the public again.
Indeed the lake is the prize.
By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
At the start of each city council meeting the Mayor reads out a notice explaining to people what to do in the event of an emergency.
On occasion he explains to the public sitting in the gallery that they are not to engage in any form of demonstration.
At one point in the Monday evening meeting at which a particularly devise issue was being debated he told the audience there was to be no booing, no hissing and no laughing.
At the beginning of the Council meeting the Mayor took a few minutes to present proclamations to people.
 The Mayor reading out and then presenting a proclamation to a representative from Diabetes Canada. Applause followed. As he handed over the proclamation to the representative from Diabetes Canada and then moved beside the woman for the photo ops that he so thoroughly enjoys the audience broke into applause.
Not a word from the Mayor on what is allowed and what is allowed and not allowed to do in the Council chamber.
The hypocrisy, the audacity – the plain cheek of the man. He diminishes the office he holds and comes across as a bit of a fool.
 By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Has there ever been a citizen petition that Councillor Jack Dennison thought had some merit?
He certainly didn’t have much time for the petition Joanne Arnold presented to city council last night when the decision to approve the bylaw necessary to allow the developer to proceed with the next step as being debated.
 Ward 4 Councillor Jack Dennison – not a fan of citizen petitions. We have yet to see Councillor Dennison ever accept a petition at face value. He consistently challenges the contents of a petition – last night he asked Ms Arnold if she could verify the 144 names that were on the petition – she could not.
“Were they all from Burlington” Dennison asked. Ms Arnold said that some of the people who responded may have been out of the country and responded from wherever they were.
Dennison managed to discredit what the delegator believed was a demonstration of commitment.
He was having none of it.
So much for encouraging people to express their views. It will be sometime before Joanne Arnold chooses to appear before city council
By Pepper Parr
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
She did what she always does – hammers away at the point she wants to make.
If there is going to be any grass near the now approved 23 storey condominium the city is going to have to lay sod in the Civic Square. During the lengthy city council meeting Monday evening Ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward asked each of the delegations what they thought was an appropriate height for the condominium tower that has been proposed for the north east corner of Brant and John Streets – across the street from city hall.
Meed Ward knew what the answers were going to be – there wasn’t a single delegation that was for the 23 storeys that were recommended by the Planning department. The developer had asked for 27 storeys.
 Councillor Sharman with his back to the camera debates with Councillor Meed Ward during Strategy Planning sessions. She doesn’t back away from a difference of opinion. Neither does he. Meed Ward has always been opposed to height in the downtown core. She has a following and represents the views and feelings for the city that many want to retain.
The Mayor sort of shares her view – he just isn’t as good as she is at making her point and sticking to it.
Meed Ward is the only member of Council who consistently asks questions of delegations and staff.
She’s not shy about saying she doesn’t understand something. She sees her role as that of getting the answers she needs and doing the same for her constituents.
Monday evening was a disappointing night for Marianne Meed Ward on several levels – she didn’t make as much as a dent in the position four of the members of council had taken.
She is never going to get a change of mind or a change of heart from Councillors Craven or Sharman.
 Councillors Meed Ward and Lancaster pose with five members of the Friends of Freeman Station. She will get a smidgen of acknowledgement from Dennison. She and Councillor Lancaster have never been close – except for the exceptional work the two of them did in saving the Freeman station.
Meed Ward sits beside Councillor Taylor – if anyone was going to side with her philosophically it would have been Taylor – he didn’t budge.
So – what does Meed Ward take away from the decision? She certainly keeps her followers happy – are there enough of them to elect her as Mayor in the October 2018 election?
If Burlington is going to elect Meed Ward as Mayor they want to ensure that they elect people who share some of her views – or this city will face four years of political grid lock.
By Staff
November 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Sounds like rubbing the salt into the wound.
The Board of Education sent out a media release asking Lester B. Pearson high parents if they might be interested in serving on a sub-committee to prepare for the school’s closing in June 2018.
They have until December 1st to send in an Expression of Interest Submission form.
On the same day a group of parents from the school were told by the Board that Patrick Brown, Leader of the Ontario Opposition could not tour the schools.
 Rory Nisan and George Ward trading contact information – both have been active in efforts to keep their school open. In their media release the Board said the Lester B. Pearson High School’s Integration Committee is seeking subcommittee members and volunteers to form two subcommittees in preparation of the school’s closing in June 2018. Members of the subcommittees can be students, staff, parents, alumni or community members.
The first subcommittee is being created to assist in the identification, gathering and cataloguing of Lester B. Pearson High School artifacts and the development of a plan to honour memorabilia. Members of the second subcommittee will assist in the planning of closing ceremonies and community activities.
 Where will the school’s memorabilia go? Tasks of subcommittee members and volunteers include, but are not limited to:
• Creating an inventory of artifacts and memorabilia items (e.g. banners, graduate composites, awards, etc.)
• Designing and dedicating space to display memorabilia in the community
• Liaising with the Burlington Historical Society and Burlington museums
• Development and planning of closing ceremonies and activities
• Developing a communication strategy and timelines
“Honouring artifacts and memorabilia from Lester B. Pearson High School and celebrating the history of the school is a priority for the Integration Committee, as well as current and former students and staff,” says Terri Blackwell, Superintendent of Education for the Halton District School Board.
If you are interested in this opportunity, as a subcommittee member or volunteer, please complete the Expression of Interest form The form will be available until Friday, December 1, 2017. The subcommittees will be formed prior to the first meeting on December 14, 2017.
 Bateman and Pearson high school parents are hoping that Margaret Wilson, the Facilitator doing an Administrative Review of the Board decision to close the schools will recommend that the PAR process be done a second time. Parents at the two high schools scheduled to close are hanging their hopes for a change in the decision on the Administrative Review of the process the Board used to close the school.
It is a stretch – but Administrative Reviews have in the past sent a decision back to a school board and required them to do the Program Accommodation Review a second time.
The problem with this “hope” is that it all goes back to the elected trustees that made the decision to close the schools.
That’s the level at which a change has to be made.
By Staff
November 14, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The Halton District School Board has denied a request to have Progressive Conservative Education Critic and party leader MPP Patrick Brown visit two Burlington High Schools.
Representatives from Robert Bateman and Lester B. Pearson Parent Councils submitted requests to have Brown visit their schools as part of their efforts to highlight the critical roles their schools play in the community.
The denial came from HDSB representative Marnie Denton who told the groups that “there aren’t to be school tours by politicians at this time.” When asked whether this was a Board staff or Trustee decision, Ms Denton provided a three word response “Board staff decision”. No other reasons for the denial of the request were provided despite several requests.
 Tony Brecknock Tony Brecknock, a member of the Pearson Parent Council said “denying a visit to the school – any visit by a very important member of our political system and society – is failing both the students of Pearson and Bateman and the community as a whole.”
Brecknock adds that the Board seems “afraid of the exposure but this is unacceptable in a transparent, democratic society.”
Both Robert Bateman High School and Pearson High School are slated for closure following the HDSB’s Program Accommodation Review (PAR) conducted earlier this year. Committees working to save both schools were successful in their requests to the Ministry of Education for Administrative Reviews – one of the only mechanisms available for communities to fight school closures. Last month, Margaret Wilson was appointed Facilitator for the Reviews currently underway.
 Bateman parents and students demonstrating to keep their school open. Deb Wakem who is a Bateman parent and a member of that Parent Council says that “if the school board is to learn from their mistakes and improve a process which has massive ramifications on the community and our children we need to work together – politicians, the school board, community – to ensure we have the best process in place.
Wakem also suggests that “by not allowing Patrick Brown to visit these amazing schools, the HDSB is merely hiding from responsibility, accountability and transparency.”
 Ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward with Ontario Leader of the Opposition Patrick Brown at a Queen’s Park rally. Patrick Brown, the leader of the provincial PC party has been an outspoken critic of the Liberal government’s record of school closures in Ontario and called for a moratorium on such closures in early 2017 well ahead of the government’s current moratorium. As part of the PC’s Recommended Policy Resolutions currently being considered by their members, the party is recommending “an immediate moratorium on school closures and an immediate review of any schools that are slated to close.”
 By Staff
November 14, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
They are bringing in the big guns.
 Sarah Harmer, will speak at the Tyandaga Environmental Coalition public meeting. Juno award winning singer, songwriter and conservation activist, Sarah Harmer, will speak at the Tyandaga Environmental Coalition public meeting on November 16, 2017 in Burlington, Ontario.
Harmer will join a group of environmental experts and advocates to raise public awareness of the scheduled deforestation of northwest Burlington by Meridian Brick.
An estimated 9,000 trees are scheduled to be clear cut for an urban quarry that mines shale for brick production. The threatened area contains about 35 acres prime forest, habitat to a number of at-risk and endangered species, including an endangered Jefferson dependant unisexual salamander that was discovered in the spring.
Meridian Brick is expanding its quarry under an aggregate license that was issued in 1972. The proposed quarry expansion would now come as close as 35m to homes in the Tyandaga neighborhood, threatening the health and well-being of the community.
 PERL took years and a lot of local fund raising to get to the point where a Joint Tribunal ruled that the application for a quarry expansion was to be denied because of the endangered species on the property. The upper orange outline is the existing quarry – the lower outline is where the expansion was to take place. Sarah Harmer co-founder of the conservation organization PERL (Protect Escarpment Rural Land) that helped stop an 82-hectare aggregate quarry on the Niagara Escarpment at Mt. Nemo north of Burlington. She continues to raise awareness of the environmental impact of aggregate mining.
Harmer will join a list of environmental experts that includes Gord Miller, former Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, David Donnelly, environmental lawyer and former Director of the Canadian Environmental Defense, Dr. Lynda Lukasik, environmental advocate for sustainable community development and the Executive Director at Environment Hamilton, and Roger Goulet, Executive Director for PERL.
The Tyandaga Environmental Coalition (TEC) is a group of concerned citizens fighting to save Burlington’s greenspace and protect the health and wellbeing of the city’s residents. Once a small group of like-minded-neighbors that came together when quarry expansion was announced, the environmental coalition now has nearly 3,000 supporters that are helping to petition the Honourable Kathryn McGarry (Ontario Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry) and the Honourable Chris Ballard (Ontario Minister of the Environment and Climate Change).
 The west and centre quarries are nearing the end of life and the company wants to now quarry in the eatern section that is metres away from private homes. TEC is requesting that the proposed urban quarry extension have an immediate independent evaluation of the impact on the community based on the current demography and updated environmental and health standards. Also needed are further studies of how clear cutting an estimated 35 acres of forested habitat will affect endangered species. These studies need to be viewed from the perspective of current environmental law.
The meeting will be held on November16, 2017, 7:00 pm at the Crossroads Centre located at 1295 North Service Road, Burlington
By Pepper Parr
November 13th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
 Marcello Beltrami Marcello Beltrami is a 17 year old Italian student in Burlington as part of a Rotary International student exchange. He will be staying with four different families during his yearlong visit.
He is with Tom and Margaret Hayes for the first three months. Exchange students are nothing new to the Hayes household – they have had students from France, Thailand, Brazil and Peru.
Tom and Margaret are basically empty nesters – he is a mechanical engineer she is an accountant.
Marcello is a student at Assumption high school where he takes English as a second language classes and is also taking classes in biology. His student bent seems to be in the sciences.
When student exchange interviews take place – everyone is on their best behavior – the situation is always perfect – never any problems.
 Tom Hayes, Marcello, Margaret Hayes and the family dog In the Hayes household – that’s actually the way it was. The dog barked and sniffed where you didn’t want him to sniff. The cat had that insouciance that only cats and very attractive women manage to pull off.
And Marcello giggled while telling me about how he was teaching Tom to make pizza. In Burlington pizza is something we order in – Marcello is Italian and he assumed that everyone makes the pizza from scratch.
Marcello wasn’t a guest – he was a member of the family and you could feel it as the conversation bumped from Tom, to Marcello and then on to Margaret.
What did Marcello know about Canada before he got here: that we are known for Maple Syrup and that it gets cold – very cold.
Home in Italy is in Cremona – in the southern part of Italy. His Mom is an English teacher and with Skype on his computer he can be in touch with his parents whenever he wants.
The Hayes are doing a superb job of ensuring that Marcello gets out and learns about the country. He had the traditional pea meal bacon sandwich at the St. Lawrence Market, got to Montreal to watch the Canadiens play Detroit; the Hayes household is part of that tribe that still believes the Maple Leafs will win a Stanley Cup – soon. Marcello was oblivious to that tribal trait.
On a trip to Little Italy Marcello met a woman from Calabria, Italy and immediately fell into a conversation about where he was from and what he was doing in Canada.
During the summer the family took Marcello to the lake and gave him a chance to try water skiing – “He got up the first time” said Tom. Skating is next for the Italian.
What is Marcello allowed to do? His behaviour is guided by what Rotarians describe as the five D’s.
 Margaret Hayes explains the Rotary 5Ds No driving
No drinking
No drugs
No dating
No dis figuration – tattoos, nose rings.
The last week of the yearlong experience is spent by all the International students on a two week tour of eastern Canada.
Margaret Hayes is a strong advocate for the International Student idea. She believes that the better we understand each other the more peaceful the world we live in will be. This she was disappointed when just three people in Burlington applied for the International experience and she isn’t quite sure why the number of applicants was so low.
 Tom Hayes Through the interview there was a lot of joshing and kidding back and forth. Marcello will move on to the next family he will spend three months with – Tom is going to miss that young man.
Marcello speaks to the Lakeshore Rotary Club at lunch on Tuesday.
By Staff
November 13th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Elgin Street between Locust Street and Blathwayte Lane will be closed on November 14 and 15, 2017 from 7:00 am to 7:00 p.m. for excavation work.
Signs and barricades will be up.
The Saxony development has had excavation problems related to water that wasn’t originally evident.
 Excavation work at the Saxony development site.
By Pepper Parr
November 13, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Petitions!
Do they make a difference?
 The 421 Brant development, approved by a city council Standing Committee, goes before city council for approval this evening. Are they an accurate barometer of what the public in general is thinking or are they an opportunity for people who are opposed to something to show their opposition?
Do the politicians pay attention to petitions?
In many cases a petition is the only voice people have when they want to oppose something their government.
The current petition asking the city to stick to the current zoning for the northeast corner of Brant and James streets was put forward by Joanne and Kevin Arnold who said they created the petition to change something they cared about. 1384 people have added their name so far.
The people who are opposed to the New Street Road Diet have collected 2641 signatures as of January – that is the most recent number – appear to have signatures from the ward the bike lanes are in.
UPDATE: As of Nov 13th there are 3262 signatures, plus 500 signatures on a hard copy of the petition.
A number of years ago Councillor Marianne Meed Ward created a petition to oppose the sale of lake front property the city owned between Market and St. Paul Street – she got more than 2000 names on that petition. The property was still sold.
Those opposed to the now recommended development at Brant and James have the right to delegate before city council.
The city is faced with a serious problem – they are required to add significantly to the population of the city and there isn’t very much land on which to build new homes. They can’t build out – so they are going to build up. And they chose to recommend to council that a project that would have 23 storeys be approved. The 5-2 vote was pretty emphatic.
Are those opposed to the development – they say they are not opposed to height they just don’t want it built on property so close to the waterfront – wanting a Burlington that cannot be sustained?
 Gary Scobie delegating before city council – he was one of the few that had anything to say about the development at a city Standing Committee early in November. There were not very many public delegations speaking against the development when it was at the Standing Committee stage. The city manager spoke more forcefully for the project than any city manager has spoken in this reporter’s memory.
City councils are elected – put in office to serve the people. If the public is really, really, really opposed to this project have several hundred of the 1380 who signed the petition get off their couches and head for city hall and use their five minutes to demand that city council respect their wishes.
Something like THAT would have an impact.
The Gazette has published the delegation Tom Muir, an Aldershot resident will make to city Council this evening. A review of the comments about his delegation is worth a read – it gives a sense as to how the public feels about this issue.
An Open Letter from former Mayor Mary Munro to the current Mayor is also a solid insight on how this development proposal has been managed.
Salt with Pepper is an opinion column written by the publisher and sole share holder of the Burlington Gazette.
By Staff
November 13th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
 The Halton Regional Police Service remains committed to road safety through prevention, education and enforcement initiatives.
Members of the public are reminded that driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol is a crime in progress and to call 9-1-1 immediately to report a suspected impaired driver.
The Service’s Twitter and Facebook accounts should not be used for this purpose as they are not monitored 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Please be reminded that all persons charged are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
On Thursday, November 9, 2017, after 2:30am, witnesses reported a suspected impaired driver in Milton and a traffic stop was initiated near Division Street and Spruce Boulevard in the Town of Halton Hills. Brennan Senos (52) of Halton Hills was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and driving over 80mgs.
On Saturday, November 11, 2017, just after 12:30am, Halton Police officers investigated a collision involving a suspected impaired driver in Burlington. Police charged Meredith Read (42) of Oakville with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and impaired driving over 80mgs.
On Saturday, November 11, 2017, after 9:00pm, a traffic stop was initiated at Upper Middle Road and Headon Road in Burlington. As a result of an investigation, Matthew Henry (18) of Burlington was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle.
On Sunday, November 12, 2017, after 12:30am, witnesses reported a suspected impaired driver in Halton Hills and a traffic stop was initiated at Trafalgar Road and Princess Anne Boulevard. Anastasija Kondrasova (26) of Mississauga was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and driving over 80mgs.
.
By Staff
November 12th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Carriage Gate was given an award at the annual Halton Hamilton Housing Builders Association (HHHBA) Gala dinner.
The award was to recognize the developer for working with HHHBA staff and Management on ongoing planning, development and housing construction initiatives in Burlington and their attention to the interests of home purchasers.
Carriage Gate has a development before city council Monday evening.
By Tom Muir
November 12th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Tom Muir has been delegating to city council as long as the current members have been keeping those council seat warm. John Taylor has served the longest – close to 25 years. Muir is relentless. When he gets his teeth into a bone he just doesn’t let go.
The city is facing a point where it has to decide how it wants to grow and where that growth should take place,
The focus is on Brant Street at this point where a developer has assembled property and taken a proposal for a 27 story condominium to the city’s Planning and Development department where is was recommended but reduced to 23 storey’s. City Council’s Planning and Development committee approved the Staff recommendation on a vote of 5-2. Monday night it goes to city council where it will be approved, revised or nor approved. Here is what Muir thinks of the process so far.
Dear Councilors,
I provided written correspondence on this item to the P&D meeting of Nov. 1, but I was unable to attend that meeting personally.
At this stage in the process, with Committee approval, the conversation here is largely political. With this in mind, a quote credited to Councilor Meed Ward, summarizes accurately and succinctly a question I have been wondering about in terms of how I see this Council operating.
 Whose city is it? “Whose City is it?”
To which I must add from my own experience; Councilors, Who do you represent?
From the evidence that I have been easily able to gather, on this matter, you are, most of you, not representing the citizens that elected you. You appear to have been immunized against the opinions of your constituents.
It is their city, but you do not appear to be hearing them. They are telling you loud and clear that they don’t want these building heights/density, with the associated problems, and they want to know why you are not enforcing the existing laws.
I looked at several recent staff report sections containing public comments. Many of these comments were lengthy and reasoned.
421 Brant St. Neighborhood Meeting: 22 comments – 20 opposed 2 supportive, of which 1 was in the development business.
421 Brant St Statutory Meeting: Of 10 comments, with no exception, the original proposed height of 27 stories was unacceptable – not just a little bit, like 23 is okay, but it was a rejection. For representative examples you can see my P&D correspondence.
421 Brant St. P&D Meeting Nov. 1. There was 1 personal delegation opposed.
There were 3 letters of correspondence, of which 2 were opposed, and 1 offered support for redevelopment but wanted to see compliance with existing OP and bylaws.
So out of 36 public comments received, 33, or 92% are opposed.
And the city says the public is broadly consulted, and uses that claim to defend decisions that are clearly opposed by the public in these consultations.
So who is represented here, and whose city is it really?
 Aldershot resident Tom Muir. Going further in my findings of public comments on current proposals, let’s consider the Molinaro proposal for 22 (or 24?) stories on Brock St.
Molinaro Brock St. Neighborhood meeting: 9 are opposed, and none spoke in support.
Molinaro Statutory Meeting of Nov. 6/17: There were 4 personal delegations and all were opposed.
There were 13 additional written comments, 12 of which are opposed, and 1 was neither clearly opposed nor supportive, but had several issues and concerns.
So on the Molinaro proposal, there are 26 public expressions of comments, of which 0 speak in support, 1 is equivocal, and 25 are opposed. So basically 100% do not support the proposal.
We can go to the Waterfront, and see the same dominant opposition to the city planners and developer proposals. Or elsewhere, and let’s not forget the ADI Martha St. proposal.
Comments are often lengthy, and basically express the same issues and problems. Consistent concerns are always height, density, no respect for bylaw limits and creeping up proposal by proposal, staff traffic, congestion, parking assertions that are completely at odds with public comment and concern and reality even, and many others you can read.
And adding insult to injury, city and Council can’t wait to hear the residents comment on what they think of the new OP, bylaws, and Mobility Hub ideas before voting to go far beyond anything in those documents for this location.
The draft plan ideas are still just that – not vetted, not discussed or debated, and have no approval and are therefore not policy relevant or legal. Given this, the Committee approval here makes a farce out of the formal consultation to come before it even happens.
To me this erases all doubt that the city, planners, and Council don’t respect or really care to hear what the public thinks of these plans, and wants for what is their city.
 Muir delegates and is an active participant at community meetings. Instead of waiting, as is legitimate and appropriate, decisions are made to go over and above even the 17 story limit proposed, but not approved, for this site in the new Mobility Hub Precinct ideas.
The existing limit is 12, the proposed is 17, but the City Manager and his planners, want 23. And Committee voted 5 to 2 in favor
Is that how Council wants to be seen as representing the people? In a way that drives cynicism?
Some of you say “tall buildings are the future” and “citizens need to get over their concerns”. Well, “tall” buildings in Burlington are anything above 11 stories. So the present permissible of 12 is tall. And certainly the 17 proposed in the Mobility Hub Brant St Precinct is tall. So we are there already.
Consider that the draft 17 is about half way between the existing 12 allowed, and the 23 proposed, perhaps that would be a satisfactory compromise, a hair-splitting solution, to meet there, half-way.
There are other buildings nearby that are tall, so perhaps, in that context, the citizens “could get over their concerns” with this height, if they saw something of their wants being heard.
The people have spoken pretty loud and clear – note the almost 1300 (as of Sunday Nov. 12 at 5:00PM) who signed the petition opposing the proposal.
My ask is this. I read that the Mayor and Councillor Meed Ward, in voting against approval at Committee, suggested that 17 stories was something they could live with, since we seem to be going in that direction in the draft, but not approved plans.
 Who do they represent? So I ask one of them to move, and the other to second, a motion to debate modifying the proposal to 17 stories, and for Council to approve that modification, and send it to staff for appropriate action.
|
|
