By Staff
August 31st, 2024
BURLINGTON, ON
They packed the Lions Hall last Monday evening and now they are going out into the community to get support for a petition that will ask City Council to xxx
The approach is certainly innovative enough. They have asked the Gazette to publish their petition so people can sign the petition using the QR code! It has to be submitted to our councillor, Lisa Kearns, who will sponsor the petition by September 11th.
“Please support our petition to prevent the construction of a massive 28 storey condo at 2030 Caroline! The builder plans to eliminate all previously proposed public parking and we also lose local street parking and would get another condo instead of the promised medical building and public parking!
Petition can be signed on the notice board on Elizabeth and Caroline Street or by just linking to the petition with the QR code. Please help us save our downtown neighborhood. Name and postal code is sufficient
Angela Thomson was behind the creating of the petition.
The tower at the top of the rendering was not part of the original deal when this development was first before City Council.
Mayor Meed Ward who lives blocks away from the proposed development said in her remarks.
“Thank you for including me in this correspondence, and for participating in the meeting. It was good to see so many residents in attendance. Your input is critical as we deal with this application.
“In addition to the information provided below, I can offer the following comments.
“I have followed up with our planning staff on the matter of parking.
“As noted, the current proposal does not include public parking in the parking garage. This is not what was originally contemplated when the development was approved (before my time on council) and the city sold its parking lot to enable a comprehensive block plan redevelopment. The vision for public parking and a medical centre was reinforced in our renewed 2020 Official Plan, via my motion, co-sponsored by the Ward 2 Councillor. That vision remains the official position of Council on this parcel of land. However, as the community is aware, applicants can apply to change our plans and we have a legal obligation to review their proposals through a fair and open process.
“Please be assured that staff and council understand the importance of addressing public parking as part of the future development of these lands. This will be duly considered in staff’s assessment of the application.
“Thank you for being engaged on this project, and please continue to share your input.”
Related news story:
Councillor explains what can be done.
This is pretty much bound for OLT, unless the overall planning policy frame contains something that the negotiation and say no argument skills of Jamie Tellier can work with, to take a chunk out of the 28 floors ask.
Nonetheless, from the history of the Gallery on 421 Brant across from City Hall going back to 2017 meetings, this avoiding OLT is unlikely. This was a rancorous overwhelmingly public opposed application at 23 floors, 169 units, 338 people, by my notes of the neighborhood meeting.
As I recall, it did go to OMB, and a negotiated settlement approved 17 floors. Then-Ward 2 Councilor Meed Ward voted against the settlement, the only negative as I recall (correct me if I’m wrong please?).
I remember the overall plan approved in the City OP of 1997 used to plan the Gallery, with all the Gallery plan adjoined policy stated allowed things. After all this time these have been eliminated from the proposal, illustrated here in last weeks briefing – really trans-formative changes – although not all negative.
Really not the same by any measure, except notably the same strong public opposition, and the same bullish tactics of the Carnicelli ownership of the Gallery application during the process.
I have some final points.
First, the province calls pretty much all the shots of policy and process.
Second, there has been a lot of monetary inflation and policy inflation and risk reduction in what is reality, and allowed by the province’s ever growth pushing edicts . So even if ownership is old, and previous applications or commitments made, there is a very strong incentive to then just sit on them for years, making all kinds of excuses. This happened here.
It has now become viable to use the ownership and/or permissions you have, to support a new application, for more of course, because by the rules now, you cannot really lose. That has happened in Burlington, and that is what is happening here with help of apparently skilful legal arrangements of the agreements.
This is the third and really most important new rule – the provincial OLT, that this will likely go to, has ruled in favor of developers 97% of the time.
If the City doesn’t like/want what developers want, they can appeal to OLT, which is required to use the Provincial Growth Plan planning policies. If the City fails to make a decision or runs out of time, the developer can appeal. These rights are by right.Developers can’t lose, and City does not have full decision power.
PS. In another story on this, the question was raised to David Barker about how many Lakeshore properties were saved by Mayor Meed Ward, who answered the Waterfront Hotel property as “potentially”.
Note that it went to OLT and is waiting on a decision.
Back room deals certainly exist at least in the minds of those affected, despite the public legislated to be heard and Transparency being a legislated requirement of the Municipal Act. We empathize with the Appleby community. The Mayor and Councillor Kearns played a role in improperly silencing the public voice on three Ward 2 projects July and August and will more than likely get away with it unless there is an understanding in the affected communities of what occurred.
Up to now local media have been quiet for the last 12 months at least on the significant issues that include Conservation Halton concerns of spillage hazards. There has been absolutely zero information given to those who may well be affected including to 284 property owners who share a common border with the 784 Brant/Ghent Plan A. Approved at the July 16 Council with Councillor Kearns leading the unanimous approval with very little conversation. None on exactly what agreement was reached between Conservation Halton, the City and the developer on mitigation of spillage hazards.
Nor was there any conversation on any liability of the City or the developer if and when the 284 property owners who share the common border are negatively affected by identified hazards despite these agreements the details of which neither Lisa Kearns or the Mayor have discussed with their Ward 2 affected constituents.
What is concerning is the CAO position at Conservation Halton was empty on July 16 and until September 3rd as the previos CAO now sits at the Burlington Council table accountable only to Mayor Meed Ward despite a council motion to have him reporting to council and a well supported petition presented at council. Hassan Basit was absent from the July 16th Counci which so happens was one of two July dates 15/16 of the second flooding disaster in Burlington history.
An accurate description of the Mayor’s interests are centred around her own littlle neighborhood. Other than that she simply wants numbers of shovels in ground and works at her end goal claiming the public voices were heard when in fact in the last three applications they were gagged contrary to claims set out in public notices.Yes, the down town has been well and truly misled and mistreated and we will sign the petition but the Mayor and council not having any part of that over the last 14 years is simply rubbish.
It’s nice that the mayor supports the residents in her ward when the building would directly impact her. It’s interesting that in North Burlington nobody cares two winks what happens and the 2 x 29 stories going up at Palladium Way/Thomas Alton and Appleby Line (that were supposed to be a max height of 8 stories. The residents fought against it delegating at council en masse – MMW purported to support the community by helping them delegate (before she was mayor) and then a back room deal was struck with the developer unbeknownst to the residents and the towers were a go). No one cares either when residents call about safety issues with the worksite and no one bothers to call back. Parking issues, garbage, traffic, and on and on – where is the councillor and city staff trying to resolve those issues?
This council seems to only care about certain people and not others. From what I can see Ward 6 councillor Bentevigna does a whole lot of work and campaigning for and with the Millcroft residents but again, doesn’t give two winks about Alton Village. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see why.