By Pepper Parr

MARCH 11th, 2021

BURLINGTON, ON

 

The people who made the time to watch the first meeting on the approach the city wants to take to its Housing Strategy got a sense as to the size of the problem – along with plea from city staff running the virtual event to please take part in the survey and let them hear from you.

There weren’t enough people to keep the phone lines buzzing – a couple of people got in twice, one small developer created a phony name for himself and called in twice; one gentlemen needed three cracks at the log in procedure to make it to the screen.

Organizationally – it was presented in a traditional way – with a panel of people who are close to housing issues and have an understanding of the size of the challenge.

Then a panel of citizens and then calls were taken from those watching.

The five experts knew their stuff and brought unique and important perspectives to the event.

Mike Simiono, newly acquired Director of Community Planning (Burlington poached him from Oakville) talked about the meaning of owning a house and the role it take in creating community.

Ted Hildebrandt did a statistical overview. Some of his material was dated but the points were still clearly made.

The number of people who drive to Burlington from Hamilton was startling – the belief is that people live in Hamilton because housing is less expensive there.

 

 

 

City staff did an entry explanation to set the context within which the city has to work. Currently the city has no direct responsibility for housing: that responsibility rests with the Region – they work with what the province makes available in terms of enabling legislation and funding.

The federal government does have a National Housing policy – it just doesn’t seem to be meeting the needs of places like Burlington.

Central Mortgage and Housing (CMHC) has been active and creative in funding and sponsoring creative approaches to housing – the co-op housing sector would not exist were it not for CMHC.

The cost of housing in Burlington and the availability of affordable housing is the challenge before the working group the city is setting up to dive deep into the data.

City council endorsed a recommendation from the Planning department and hired consultants.  The plan is to move into an action-implementing mode once the results of the survey have been analyzed as well as any feedback from those that took part in the Zoom meeting.

A report gets taken to Council on April 6th.

There is a survey on the city Get Involved part of the web site. That survey is open until Match 19th – LINK to the survey.

 

 

There are affordable units in Burlington:

1,497 subsidized units made available by community housing providers in Burlington

838 units across 13 properties are directly owned/operated by Halton Community Housing Corporation.

659 other subsidized housing units are made available by 11 other non profit and cooperative housing providers funded by Halton Region.

162 additional new subsidized (brick and mortar) units were recently created in Burlington by the Region as part of the Comprehensive Housing Strategy

344 additional subsidized housing options and growing have been secured in Burlington with 16 landlords using rent supplement funding.

125 additional Burlington based households and growing are receiving a portable housing allowance to subsidize their rents.

This adds up to 2,128 subsidized units in Burlington.

City Council wants to increase that number – and is hoping to come up with a strategy that will make it possible.

There will be a part 2 with the comments made by the panelists.

 

By Pepper Parr

February 10th, 2021

BURLINGTON, ON

The following series is lengthy.  It sets out what the city has decided it wants to do on development projects that will put tax money at risk.  None of what is now known as the Burlington Lands Project was discussed, nor even mentioned, during the last municipal election. It bears watching

Part 4 of a 4 part series.

 

When talking through the Terms of Reference for the latest hot idea from City Hall – members of Council were not shy about looking for a way to sit on the Selection Committee – the place where the decisions are going to be made.

The document that set out who would be on this all-important committee had the Mayor, the Chair of the Corporate Services, Strategy, Risk and Accountability (CSSRA) who, this year, is Ward 2 Councillor Lisa Kearns.  The Chair of the four Standing Committees change each year.

Vice Chair of the CSSRA is Shawna Stolte who has made it clear that she feels she should be on the committee for several reasons.

She has a strong commitment to the concept of affordable housing and points to her private sector experience in the field and the fact that she is still a licensed realtor. And, she added, as the vice chair of the CSSRA she would bring some continuity to Council representation on the Burlington Lands Project because she will be chair next year.

Councillor Sharman didn’t see the Stolte bonafides quite the same way. He went so far as to say there had to be some merit in adding someone to the Selection Committee and that experience is important.

The original plan was to have two members of Council on the Selection Committee. Adding the vice chair of the CSSRA to the two would take it up to three which was not quite what City Manager Tim Commisso had in mind when he structured this latest initiative for the city.

He was rather firm when he said that there was not going to ever be four members of Council on the Selection Committee – that would have amounted to a Council quorum.

The decision as to the membership on the Selection Committee as it is set out in the Terms of Reference appears to rest with the City Manager and the Clerk.

The decision on the final Version of the Terms of Reference will be decided when the issue goes to City Council on the 19th.

The Mayor would rather do without Councillor Sharman. She’s not at all interested in giving the only real competitor on Council for her job as Mayor any oxygen.   The next election is just 20 months away; all kinds of things can happen in that period of time.

There are people prepared to run against at least some of the incumbents and there are at least two members of the current Council who are at risk.

Marianne Meed Ward will run for re-election and win – providing she doesn’t slip on a banana peel and slide under a bus and providing she finds a way to come up with a budget that enough residents can live with.

At this point there is no reason to expect a strong contender from within the development sector.  Some of the decisions coming out of the LPAT might change that.

There are two members of Council who have their eye on the Chain of Office but they are at least another term as Council members before they have the credibility to take a run at the job.

Sharman will run for Mayor if he sees an opening he can exploit. He will have been on Council 12 years.

Despite how polite the members of this council are to each other – this is not a bunch of really happy campers.  Meed Ward has yet to find a way to bring them around to the point where they buy into the dream she has and also a way to coax the five newbies into her tent.

We will know before the end of the month who will join her on the Burlington Lands Project Selection Committee.

Part 1 of a 4 part series

Part 2 of a 4 part series

Part 3 of a 4 part series

By Pepper Parr

February 9th, 2021

BURLINGTON, ON

The following is lengthy.  It sets out what the city has decided it wants to do on development projects that will put tax money at risk.  None of what is now known as the Burlington Lands Project was discussed, nor even mentioned, during the last municipal election.

Part 2 of a four part series

What is the Burlington Lands Partnership?

The Burlington Lands Partnership (“BLP”) is a flexible, multi-dimensional and integrated approach that seeks to address multiple areas of municipal strategic land management including acquisition and development. This strategic forward-looking approach will encompass the leveraging of future municipal land investments to maximize the potential benefits for the City and related partners.

For the City, the BLP will initially focus on achieving tangible and measurable community benefits and returns in three areas: supporting economic growth and direct job creation, completing “city building” projects and delivering much needed affordable housing.

Oversight and strategic direction will be provided by a new steering committee that is ultimately accountable to Burlington City Council. The committee is proposed to consist of the Mayor, the City Manager, the Council member serving as current Chair of the Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility Committee, key senior municipal staff, and representation from Burlington Economic Development (both the Board and staff).

Additional partner-based stakeholders such as community leaders, the heads of community organizations, and representatives of private corporations are proposed to be part of smaller project specific task forces that are accountable and report to the BLP Steering Committee.

Why is the Burlington Lands Partnership Needed?

• There are several strategically positioned and emerging municipal land development opportunities within Burlington, but there is no single entity that has the mandate and resources to realize the opportunities for the long-term benefit of the City.

• The establishment of a full-scale municipal development corporation (MDC), under the Municipal Act, would involve an onerous amount of capital investment and resources, which would challenge the City’s current strategic priorities, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. As reported to CPRM Committee (CM-29-20, Oct. 6,20), a different approach is needed at this time.

• There is widespread support for the City to take a greater strategic role in targeting municipal land development in Burlington.

• Burlington has many active community organizations and not-for-profits which could engage in mutually beneficial partnerships to aid in developing communities within Burlington.

• A partnership in this form allows for the City, Burlington Economic Development (Burlington EcDev), and a coalition of public and private sector partners to pursue additional funding and strategic partnerships including but not limited to the Halton Region, Province of Ontario and Government of Canada.

Mandate of BLP
Throughout 2020, urbanMetrics was engaged by the City of Burlington to assess the viability, function and structure of a municipal development corporation or other strategic land entity to facilitate the development of City owned lands with a focus on economic development and city building initiatives.

The study was undertaken in conjunction with a governance study conducted by MDB Insight to examine the role of the Burlington Economic Development Corporation.

In addition to a case study review of the land development entities in other municipalities and an assessment of development opportunities within the City, the urbanMetrics study included an extensive consultation program with the Burlington business community, Council and City staff and the Burlington Economic Development Corporation. The recommended approach to a strategic land development entity, which was subsequently brought forward and recommended by the City Manager as the Burlington Land Partnership (BLP), involved the following:

• The internal strategic real estate structure would involve Burlington EcDev, as well as other, potential partners, such as Halton Region, other public agencies, private industry and private and public institutions including not-for-profit community groups, as required.

• Oversite and strategic direction would be provided by a steering committee that would ultimately be accountable to Council. The City Manager, as staff lead, would be responsible for strategic managerial leadership and would serve as chair of the steering committee. Outside consulting expertise would be engaged as needed.

• The mandate of the organization or partnership would be on leveraging real estate to:

o Maximize opportunities for economic growth and job creation;
o Develop and implement city building projects; and
o Create opportunities for the development of affordable housing.

• Ultimately the BLP should have access to City staff and other resources to seek, identify and develop strategic land opportunities into viable projects; to direct the acquisition and disposition of related City lands; to undertake land and facility development visioning and design; to obtain necessary planning approvals; and to fully engage with outside partners.

• Initially, the BLP should be tasked with seeking, identifying and developing opportunities into viable strategic land projects. A number of opportunities have been presented through the urbanMetrics and Cresa studies. These, as well as others that may be identified in the future, need to be more formally prioritized and envisioned complete with detailed project plans, recommended by the BLP Steering Committee and approved by City Council.

• The BLP would be the first step towards the creation of a municipal development corporation, however this would not occur until 2023 (at the earliest) following a reporting to Council on the activities and accomplishments of the BLP in 2021/22.

• Establishing the BLP as a first step, achieves a good balance among the opportunities, the desire for augmented internal strategic land capabilities, the current resource capacity limitations and the need for due diligence and caution.

• The BLP will:

o Place a priority corporate focus on realizing strategic land opportunities.

o Build on and leverage existing skills, relationships and expertise within the City and Burlington EcDev.

o Enable an interim integrating structure to build organization capacity and expertise and deliver key outcomes related to strategic land management.

o Provide increased organizational capacity through the development and approval of ongoing due diligence contracts with external services firm(s) that have expertise across all facets of strategic land management.

o Provide an integrated and accountable organizational structure including a steering committee, designated staff leads and enhanced business processes including Council oversight (both open and closed session reporting in keeping with the City’s existing procedural by-law).

After an initial start-up period of two years, the organization should be evaluated on an annual basis, with respect to achieving measurable results related to:

o Supporting job creation, business creation and economic expansion;

o Developing an implementation of community-wide “City building” projects;

o Realizing tangible affordable housing opportunities and increased housing supply;

o Fiscal impact (increased assessment base/taxes, development charges, other fees);

o Enhancing the profile of the City and contributing to the public identity of Best City to Live in Canada;

o Supporting the City’s 25-year Strategic Plan, Council’s Vision to Focus 4-year work plan and community planning and other land related policies; and

o Delivering value for money and cost effectiveness to Burlington taxpayers.

Vision
Burlington remains a prosperous, vibrant and affordable community that continues to be one of Canada’s best places to live and do business, with a remarkable quality of life strengthened through partnerships, economic development and city building initiatives.

Mission
Through innovation, strategy and partnerships, the Burlington Lands Partnership, will pursue and unlock the potential of strategic land opportunities that enhance the quality of life and growth of Burlington residents and businesses.

Principles
The Burlington Lands Partnership will:

• Place a priority corporate focus on realizing strategic land opportunities.

• Build on and leverage existing skills, relationships, and expertise within the City and Burlington EcDev.

• Facilitate coordination and cooperation between community organizations, not-for- profits, private corporations, and the City and Burlington EcDev.

• Enable an interim structure to build organization capacity and deliver key outcomes related to strategic land management.

• Provide an integrated and accountable organizational structure including a steering committee, designated staff leads and enhanced business processes including Council oversight (both open and closed session reporting).

Strategic Focus
The Burlington Land Partnership will use a wide range of approaches depending on what is appropriate or possible and contingent on the needs, interested partners, and resources available for any one specific strategic land related project or opportunity.

The BLP will:
• Lend expertise and enable connections to commercial and residential land development that is undertaken by the City of Burlington, land holding community organizations or not-for-profits or private developers interested in working with the BLP.

• Work with private businesses to foster job-creating commercial real estate developments in strategic areas such as the Innovation District and Major Transit Station Areas.

• Partner with Halton Region and other organizations with an affordable housing mandate, to develop affordable housing or seek to incorporate additional affordable housing into future private or public housing developments, including but not limited to the completion and implementation of the City of Burlington Comprehensive Housing Strategy starting in 2021.

• Work with other interested potential partners and key stakeholders to ensure all surplus school sites within Burlington are evaluated and where possible, developed in a manner that improves quality of life in the local neighbourhoods and generates public value.

• Place a strategic focus on the following three priorities:

1) Encouraging Economic Development.
Objective: To maximize business development opportunities and advance future economic growth and job creation.
Key Stakeholders:

– Local businesses
– Regional businesses seeking to expand their presence
– New businesses to the region
– Commercial property developers
– Regional Municipality of Halton
– Provincial and Federal funding partners

2) Implementing City-Building Initiatives
Objective: To facilitate the implementation of city building projects that enhance the quality of life for all citizens.

Key Stakeholders:

– City Building project partners
– Regional Municipality of Halton
– Local landowners and property developers
– Provincial and Federal funding partners

3) Delivering Affordable Housing

Objective: Develop and implement projects that deliver an increased supply of affordable housing through proactive long-term strategies and innovative partnerships.

Key Stakeholders:
– Regional Municipality of Halton
– Residential Property Developers
– Housing Focused Not-for-Profits (such as Habitat for Humanity)
– Provincial and Federal funding partners

GOVERNANCE

Overview
The Burlington Lands Partnership governance structure borrows from lessons in other municipalities and the ongoing operations of the Burlington Economic Development Corporation. First, BLP is led by and accountable to Burlington City Council. Second, BLP provides an integrated and accountable organizational structure including a steering committee, designated staff leads, and enhanced business processes with Council oversight including both open and closed session reporting.
Oversight and strategic direction are provided by a steering committee that is ultimately accountable to City Council. The committee is comprised of the Mayor, the City Manager, selected members of Council and appropriate senior staff, and representation from Burlington EcDev.

BLP Steering Committee
The BLP Steering Committee will provide ongoing strategic leadership and oversight and will be established by City Council with approval of BLP Terms of Reference.
Membership consisting of the following for a period of 2 years (with exception of Chair of CPRM committee which is 1 year concurrently with their term as chair).

– Mayor.
– Current Chair of the Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility Committee of Council.
– City Manager (Chair).
– Chief Financial Officer.
– Executive Director – Legal Services and Corporate Counsel.
– Executive Director – Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility.
– Executive Director – Environment, Infrastructure and Community Services
– Executive Director – Burlington Economic Development.
– Board Member – Burlington Economic Development.

The BLP will meet on a regular basis (anticipate 3-4 meetings/year) with agenda management including meeting notes prepared/completed to the satisfaction of the City Clerk in keeping with City’s procedural by-law.

BLP Working Groups
• To be determined by the Steering Committee with approval by Council on a project-by-project basis as part of a separate project brief/plan.

Duration and Transition
The Burlington Land Partnership will function during an initial “pilot period” of two years including 2021 and 2022. A report on the strategic activities and outcomes of the BLP will be presented to Council prior to the end of their 2018-2022 terms and will include recommendations for consideration for the 2023-2026 term of Council.

The BLP represents a transitional approach that allows for the expansion of organizational capacity and a build-up of expertise that will in turn enable further consideration by Council of a formalized municipal development corporation (MDC) in line with other municipalities in Ontario and utilizing the powers allowed under the Municipal Act related to municipal corporations.

There is a lot to be said about this initiative.  That it gets presented to the public just before the current Council begins to move into election mode (the next municipal election is just 20 months away) and put on the table while the country is fighting a second wave of the COVID-19 virus can be seen as a little foolhardy.

Part 1 of a 4 part series.

By Staff

January 14th, 2021

BURLINGTON, ON

 

It is a huge development by Burlington standards.

It is what the current council used as the basic plank of their individual election campaigns back in 2018 and what the Mayor wanted to see when she took on the task of producing an Official Plan that moved the focus of development from the downtown – east and west of Brant Street and south of Prospect.

The development which will be discussed at the Community Planning, Regulation & Mobility Committee meeting on Thursday is to consist of:

Seven (7) residential towers on top of four (4) mixed use podiums.

Overall heights ranging between 29 and 37 storeys.

Podium heights ranging from 2, 5 and 6 storeys.

A total of 2,494 residential units of mixed type and tenure.

3993 m2 of commercial space.

41, 821 m2 of shared amenity space.

Five (5) levels of underground parking and a four (4) storey parking structure which will be integrated with the residential units.

Pedestrian connections to the surrounding neighbourhood and Burlington GO Station.

A Site Plan Application offers information to use existing zoning and gives you the chance to learn and be informed about the applicant’s plans.

For this application, formal engagement and public comments were received by the City of Burlington as part of the adoption of the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw policies and regulations that apply to this site.

The application was circulated with various internal staff and external agencies for review and comment.

The applicant recently responded with a re-submission which is currently under review.

A neighbourhood meeting will be planned in early 2021.

By Pepper Parr

January 6th, 2021

BURLINGTON, ON

 

“So you live in Burlington” you were asked. Nice place? As a city does it work?”

Tell me more about what the civic administration is like.

Well, you might answer – Elections in Burlington can and have made a difference.

The 2010 election brought Rick Goldring in as the Mayor – that got rid of Cam Jackson who wasn’t a bad Mayor – people didn’t like his style and Goldring was a nice guy, responsible and respected. He didn’t have a vision when he began to wear the chain of Office; he wasn’t Cam and that was what mattered.

He didn’t do anything wrong nor did he do anything.

His eight years as Mayor was all the time Marianne Meed Ward, then a Councillor for ward 2,  needed to position herself for a job she aspired to from the day that she ran against Rick Craven in Ward 1 in 2006.

The day after the 2018 election Rick Goldring was still trying to figure out why he lost.

Meed Ward had a clear objective: she was going to change the way development was done in the city.

She had made numerous much needed changes as a City Councillor and she was really sure that she had the job in the bag.

The City Manager, who Meed Ward fired the day after the was sworn in, is reported to have said to a person who worked at city hall that, if Meed Ward won he was “toast”.

At the final meeting of the 2014-18 council Meed Ward showed just what she was going to be able to achieve.  Using a “point of personal privilege” she ripped into comments that were made by defeated members of Council, saying that this kind of behavior would not be tolerated.

She set out to take the steps needed to get an Official Plan the city badly needed.

It’s not a perfect plan but it is a very good plan that puts in place the tools the city needs to shift where the development takes place.

The developers would have preferred to be able to continue putting up structures that have begun to reach the 30 storey level but they will build wherever they can build.

Burlington is a great market to develop in. The fact that the province is pushing to increase the rate at which the population grows has helped the developers. Their dream is to be able to eventually build north of Dundas and Hwy 407.

Few fully understand what Meed Ward has been able to achieve. In two years she has changed everything at the development level and at the same time given the developers areas within the city that they can build in.

The downtown core will have a number of high rise buildings. Will Meed Ward manage to save the “football” – it is going to be a challenge, there are major major dollars that have been invested and those kinds of dollars have a voice.

Way back in the beginning of the Meed Ward run for the Office of Mayor the waterfront was her focus – never forget that.

The Planning department that she has always wanted is beginning to come together. She has a City Manager with whom she works well.

The Official Plan should make it through the appeal stage because it is a good plan that a mayor made happen.  Sure she had a Council that was compliant – five of the seven were so new they had to learn how to be Councillors and leave the heavy lifting to the Mayor.

This is part of what Burlington is.

Tell me about Burlington – Part 1

By Staff

December 1st, 2020

BURLINGTON, ON

 

A  major influencing point for CORE, (Conserving our Rural Ecosystems) the organization that is opposing the application by Nelson Aggregates  seeking  additional licenses for the quarry they operate in rural Burlington – letters opposing the application are due December 14th.

So far CORE reports they have seen “54 excellent opposition letters. Heartened as we are by this response, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to what’s needed if we are to have any chance at all of influencing the MNRF to render a decision AGAINST Nelson/LaFarge Aggregate’s two-pit plan for our precious Escarpment.

CORE is looking for letters “in the hundreds; which is why we’re asking all 452 of our subscribers to write, today, tomorrow…but certainly by that hard deadline of December 14th.

CORE adds that: “An opposition letter to the MNRF is one of THE most important windows for public access into this entire messy bureaucratic process. Each of the approving agencies/governments involved in this clunky approval process renders their decision without consulting the others. That is why we, as members of the public who do NOT have decision making powers, MUST voice our opposition to each agency at the time when that particular agency is willing to hear from us. If you’ve already written a letter (to the City of Burlington, for example) you may use that same letter for the MNRF.

Gord Pinard, spokesperson for CORE explains that submission of comments to MNRF/Nelson is a critical part of the application review process.  It is an important opportunity for community members to register their concerns/objections, each of which must be responded to by Nelson.  Expecting that this application will ultimately end in an LPAT hearing, those who what to have a voice at the LPAT hearing must have submitted their objections during this response period.

“We’ve made it easy for you to craft your letter and send it. And if you have any trouble at all, please reach out to us for additional support. Click the link to access our step-by-step guide, including a copy-paste letter template.
https://www.coreburlington.com/what-you-can-do-now

The letter MUST be sent to:
tecia@white-water.ca
ARAApprovals@ontario.ca

And it MUST include your full mailing address, including postal code.  Without your full mailing address your letter will not be accepted.

By Staff

November 29th, 2020

BURLINGTON, ON

 

A small bus terminal on John Street that once had a recommendation from the Transit department to close the station that is the size of a standard classroom has had a serious impact on the way development in the downtown core took place.

The existence of the building and the designation it had, made it possible for the ADI Development Group to get their appeal of an application past the OMB.

The bus terminal that was now being called an MTSA came up recently when private sector Glenn Wellings talked about his boyhood days when he used buses; suggesting there might yet be a bigger role yet for the terminal.  Here is the way a planner saw the bus terminal meeting the interests of his client.

The purpose of my delegation is to speak to concerns regarding the approach and recommendations with respect to the interim control By-Law study. I do have several concerns including modifications to the Urban Growth Centre Boundary so the transition policies however, Madam Chair given my ten-minute limit, I will restrict my comments mainly to the downtown bus terminal.

There is much…..been much discussion today and previously centered around the downtown bus terminal and several decades ago, the downtown bus terminal. I’m not sure if Council members will recall, some may not have been living in the Burlington at the time used to be located at Village Square, and that was probably about 40 years ago and the terminal at that time accommodated city buses, City of Hamilton buses, Gray Coach buses, Gray Coach is no longer with us, and also Go transit buses, and it served as a very important transit hub at a time when Village square was new, and transit was less of a priority than it is today, and how I know that is as a kid growing up in Oakville, I used to frequently take the bus between Oakville and St. Catharines. So the route I would take could be the Go bus along the Lakeshore Road and I would transfer to a Gray Coach bus at Village Square, and that Gray Coach bus would stop in Hamilton, Grimsby and on to St. Catharines, so it did at one time serve an interregional transit function.

I’ll fast-forward to today, there has been no significant investment in the downtown bus terminal. For many years, at a time when I believed the city needs to be investing in transit. It appears that these limitations and deficiencies of the existing bus terminal aren’t being used as a basis to establish updated land use policies for the downtown. A planning regime recommended by the interim control By-Law study seems to accept status-quo for the downtown bus terminal, so it doesn’t speak to possibly improving things, getting back to where it used to be and serving an interregional function. That’s not where the policy regime seems to be headed.

So, the proposed policies do not in my reading support an enhanced role of this downtown bus terminal or even the potential of building something better, a new bus terminal and reintroduce into regional transit to the downtown. The downtown bus terminal has always had a different function than the Go station and the Go transit given the rail function at the Go station and the bus function downtown.

They’ve always had different functions so the typology being suggested and to support policies is really not much different than what we all know. Some may recall that the role bold official plan didn’t anticipate the potential for new transit terminal at 421 John Street and that’s parking lot no. 4 so, that was looked at previously.

The developed policies with no anticipated changes to the bus terminal or even looking at an enhanced role of that downtown bus terminal is not in my opinion long range planning. To me it is not consistent with the Urban Growth Centre nor its transit supportive or a reflection of the spirit and an intend of the major transit station area. Madam, I would like to ask for clarification on three areas and I believe Ms. MacDonald did provide clarification on one area but I just want to be clear of my understanding under the proposed policy regime, is it downtown Burlington will continue to be a Urban Growth Centre with a minimum density target of 200 people on jobs per hector and the downtown Burlington will continue to be a major transit station area and a mobility hub. I’m hoping I got that right but I would just ask for some clarification because there was some confusion and some of the delegations on that point.

Secondly, is Council likely aware the Mattamy application have been in process for more than two years and were filed under the current approved official plan and I would ask for confirmation through staff that the proposed policies are not intended to retro-actively apply to these applications moving forward. And you heard the delegation of Mr. Snider, he had indicated that there is Case Law and there are rules that the policies at the time of application are the ones that should be used to evaluate an application and there is much Case law on that point.

And thirdly, and I’m not sure the answer to this question. If the policies in the proposed Openna 119 are appealed, how does that reflect the timing of the new official plan? OPA, and I’m assuming that the official plan cannot be finalized and approved piecemeal without knowing what’s happening in the downtown, in the policy framework for the downtown which is a major source of the intensification that will occur in the city. So I’d ask for some clarification on that point. I’m not sure how that would evolve. And lastly, I would ask for written notification of any approvals of the OPA and zoning By-Law arising from this exercise and subject to clarification of those three points.

CLK: (Councillor Lisa Kearns) So you spoke about does the study consider an enhanced role of John Street of bus terminal with interregional long-range planning. So the section 3.4.4 transit network and demand does speak to the Burlington transit trips that do occur between Hamilton and Burlington. So I’m just wondering if you’re making statements that it hasn’t may be looked at the regional connectivity piece. I just want to know those things are in there. Are you aware of that?

GW: (Glenn Wellings) And I’m also looking at a little more broadly than that and may be if there is a better bus terminal, that it could be an airport shuttle service running from that. I think we all need to look at the possibilities of what the downtown bus terminal could be rather than what it is today.

CLK: Okay. So I’ll ask staff what the forward thinking long-range planning lens was applied to that. Thank you.

CSS: (Councillor Shawna Stolte – Chair of the meeting) Thank you. Now we have a question from Mayor Marianne Meed Ward.

MMW: (Mayor) So just to your clarification question, if I may, there’s no proposed changes on our agenda today to the UGC or the MTSA.

That’s been covered several times so that’s out of scope that we’re dealing with today. Just so you know. So the question is around how we enhance the transit function really throughout the City, downtown for sure. This is a very transit-friendly Council and we have added Millions in our two budgets that we have done to transit. So my question for you is…. And Go transit, of course, is provincial. We can’t tell them where to put their routes, but should a Go bus come to downtown Burlington or we get a nicer terminal and one of the recommendations was additional shelters and so forth, will the downtown ever function the same as the Go Station with 15-minute service across…. Effectively across Ontario? Would you say there is a distinction, nevertheless between those two?

GW: The GO Service just keeps on getting better and better so it does serve a great function for the City. It’s to me the only way to get downtown if you’re going to Toronto.

MMW: I agree with you on that.

GW: Yeah, so the roles have always been different and I didn’t want to suggest otherwise,

MMW: Right.

GW: But I think we can do better than what we have downtown.

MMMW: Yeah, I think we can certainly enhance that. I think… I’ll save it for my comments. We agree there is always going to be a difference between the two which means there’s a difference in ridership and land use. With respect to the Mattamy proposal that you’re representing, you raised some concerns that I was just trying to take notes about how the policy framework that we’re dealing with today, the MTSA piece, would affect that property. Do you have specific policies that you’re concerned about would somehow impact that piece?

GW: No…

MMW: you don’t want it to be retroactively applied. So I’m just wondering….

GW: No particular policies. It’s more of a general approach to evaluating the applications. Mattamy invested in this downtown at a time where there is a different mindset. I am not here to throw stones at anybody. There is a different mindset…. There was a different mindset than there is now, they’re struggling with that, and they’re trying to figure things out. They’re following what’s going on. They’re frustrated. They’re angry and they are just trying to figure out what’s going to apply going forward and I think they deserve that clarification.

So creating policies to respond to an application that’s been in process for two years to me is grossly unfair and prejudicial and if that’s going to occur, then the Mattamy applications made it to go to LPAT because they can’t be dealt with fairly in this room and I’m hoping that’s not the case, that that’s not where they want to go. They want to work with the City. But I would hope that we could clarify which policies are actually going to apply to them going forward.

MMW: Okay. I will ask that of staff. But the…. Certainly the understanding that is throughout the report is that once we approve new official plan policies, they will apply equally to everybody. Nobody gets special treatment. So unless there are specific aspects of the policy, I think that would be helpful for us to hear, if there are specific things that you think are not good planning, then please, you know, let us know sometime between now and the 30th of January.

GW: and through you, Madam Chair, not to belabor the point, but I would ask that you get legal advice on that point.