Land Use Study a 'disappointment' to some at first reading.

News 100 blueBy Pepper Parr

December 23rd, 2019

BURLINGTON, ON

First published before Christmas; the location of the full report is shown at the end of the article.

In March of last year the city brought in an Interim Control By Law which put an immediate 12 month hold to any development proposals in the Urban Growth Centre, a boundary imposed on the city by the province,

The reason for the bylaw was the rate at which development proposals were flooding into the Planning department; the city was beginning to lose control over what got built where and was working with an Official Plan that was badly out of date and a zoning schema that needed updating.

The 2014-2018 City Council had passed a new Official Plan months before its term expired.  That “adopted” went to the Region for approval.  While the “adopted” plan was being considered at the Region the city held a municipal election – we had a new mayor and five new members on a 7 member city council.

Shortly after the council was sworn in the Regional government returned the “adopted” Official Plan to the city asking for what were some minor changes and added that the city could make additional changes if they wished.

The new City Council, with a new Mayor, took that opportunity to re-write the “approved” Official Pan.  That re-write is currently taking place. In the parlance that is used by the planners these days the land use study will “inform” the re-write of the “adopted” Official Plan

While all that is going on the Planning department was told by Council to bring in consultants to help determine what should be done with the Urban Growth Centre (UGC)

Study area

This map does not appear to be identical to the map we saw when the Interim Bylaw was being put in place. Waiting for some comment from the Planning department

 

The decision to impose an Interim Control Bylaw came out of the blue as far as the public was concerned.

For the Planning department and the senior levels of the city administration it was a move that had to be made.

Development applications were flooding into the Planning department – staff were overwhelmed and the city was in the process of losing the control it did have over what was developed, how high the towers were going to be and where they would be located.

The decision meant real financial hardship for at least one developer and a retirement home operator.

Heather MacDonald, Executive Director of Community Planning, Regulation and Mobility was given a lot of latitude and the funding needed to source a consultant – she was permitted to sole source for this task rather than have to go out to the market.  Her budget was $600,000

John Street bus terminal

It is a building that at one point was recommended for closure by the Transit department. It became a huge stumbling block for the city during an appeal the ADI Development group made on the site for the 24 storey Nautique.

Heather MacDonald,  said in announcing the release of the report “The recommendation to implement an ICBL was brought forward by City staff in response to two primary concerns, including growth pressures that continue to emerge for the lands in the study area and a need to review the role and function of the John Street Bus Terminal as a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA).

With the findings of the study in hand, the city has called for a Statutory meeting January 14th at which the public can delegate and Councillors can ask questions.  Expect this to be a contentious meeting.  Staff will listen, take notes and use what they hear at the Statutory meeting to prepare the recommendations  that will be included in the Staff report they bring to Council later in the year.

Many were concerned that the report could not be produced in the one year time frame – MacDonald surprised many when it was delivered two months early.

The 135 page document with graphics galore needs time and consideration.

Mayor Marianne Meed Ward said she: “I will be  reading the staff report and accompanying appendices overt the holidays and will have more to say in January. I welcome the public participation. This is another step in the process to get the community’s vision reflected in our downtown. We are well on track to completing this work when the one-year deadline on our ICBL is up

The purpose of the ICBL Study was to:

  • Assess the role and function of the downtown bus terminal and the Burlington GO station on Fairview Street as Major Transit Station Areas
  • Examine the planning structure, land use mix and intensity for the lands identified in the Study Area; and,
  • As required, provide recommendations to the City on updates to the Official Plan and Zoning bylaw regulations for the lands identified in the Study Area.

In the report the consultants said:

“There is a strong policy basis for Burlington’s Downtown John Street Bus Terminal as an MTSA and hence the numerous policy documents at the Provincial, Regional and City levels which identify an MTSA in the Downtown. Lands within the Downtown Burlington are identified as an MTSA in the Big Move, Halton Region Official Plan and the City’s adopted Official Plan (but not within the in force Official Plan). Furthermore, a number of long range plans identify potential for transit improvements along Brant Street to enhance connectivity between the Downtown and Burlington GO MTSAs. The Province’s RTP 2041 includes a “Priority Bus / Priority Streetcar” corridor on Brant Street between Downtown Burlington and the Burlington GO Station; and Halton Region’s DMTR reinforces this opportunity, identifying the link between the Burlington GO Station and the Downtown as a Priority Transit Corridor.

The consultants added:

If there was ever a place to locate a transit terminal - that would be John Street where the only terminal in the city is now located. Transit department is recommending it be removed and tickets sold at city hall. Ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward isn't buying that business case

Tough to describe the John Street bus station as a Major Transit Station Area. There was just an estimated 320 boarding/alightings in the am peak period.

“From a policy perspective, the Downtown Burlington John Street Terminal is clearly understood to be a Major Transit Station Area. From an operational perspective the John Street Terminal is estimated to have 320 boarding/alightings in the am peak period, with potential to grow to 1800 boardings/alighting in the future. However, in comparison to the characteristics of typical major bus depots, the John Street Terminal has a number of limitations which underpin its lower ridership levels, including:

  • Limited number of major trip generators in the Downtown;
  • Limited connectivity to Burlington GO Station;
  • Limited station infrastructure; and,
  • Limited number of convergence and limited number transfers.

“With the above-noted limitations in mind, it is important to recognize that not all MTSAs are equal. The various density guidelines (e.g. Growth Plan density targets, Mobility Hub Guidelines and MTO’s Transit Supportive Guidelines) reinforce the notion that there is a hierarchy when it comes to transit, with facilities which operate in dedicated right-of-ways, such as subways, LRTs and BRTs, having the greatest potential for ridership compared to bus services which operate in mixed traffic. And while the current ridership levels are low, despite the fact that the Downtown is the City’s densest area, the John Street Terminal functions as a relatively important transfer point in the context of the City’s system.

“With this in mind, the station alone is not understood to be a significant driver of intensification, however, certain forms of intensification, such as employment uses or other major trip generators would help to reinforce the function of the MTSA. Furthermore, future improvements to services and infrastructure could help to improve ridership.”

nautique-elevation-from-city-july-2016

Shovels are in the ground. A development the city did not want, a development that began the high rise fever and alerted other developers with just what they could get away with in Burlington.

That, unfortunately, was just the argument that the ADI Development Group used to convince the then OMB to approve their Nautique appeal. The idea that transit will be used by people who live in the downtown core suggests a huge failure to understand just how transit is used in this city.

Put a free bus running up and down Brant Street and people will use the service – you don’t need an MTSA to make that happen.

During a Standing Committee the public was led to believe that the Region could, if asked, declare that the John Street terminal was not a MTSA.  The consultant also said that the province has never refused to permit a change in the boundaries of an Urban Growth Centre – but added that no one has never asked the Minister of Municipal Affairs to change a boundary.

This may be one of those occasions where that phrase GROW BOLD, would apply.

The Land Use Study has a number of graphics that give credence to that “a picture is worth more than 1000 words” phrase.

Two that will interest many follow.

Brant St elevations

Top graphic is what the heights on Brant street now look like as you look eastward. Bottom graphic is the opposite direction.

 

Existing built form from the lake

This is the elevations looking north from the lake.

 

Height levels within UGC

Where the height is located.

We will return to a very important document – one that the Gazette believes has to be revised if the intentions of a majority of the current council are to be achieved.

 

The full report can be found HERE

Appendix B is the consultants report.

Return to the Front page
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

8 comments to Land Use Study a ‘disappointment’ to some at first reading.

  • David

    Canada has a population of some 37m people, of that some 75% live within 100 miles of the U.S. border (5,500 miles) which equals 550,000 square miles.
    If you search other countries with roughly the same land mass, you will see populations far exceeding Canada’s, Our population should be at least double, giving us more global relevance.
    This city should be looking at building for a population of at the bare minimum of 500,000.
    Trying to cram an extra 300,000 people into and around the downtown core is futile no matter how high you build.
    The green belt will have to go. City hall should be relocated to the centre of Burlington this area will become a true Hub a true City Centre.

    • Don Fletcher

      Nigeria will be glad to know that their global relevance will increase due to their population increasing from 200 million in 2020 to a forecast 300 million in 2036.

      • David

        Interesting you chose Nigeria….Although an oil rich nation they have been struggling with corruption for many years hopefully their new government will be, able over time to correct some of the problems that is inherent in this region.

        Living in the West I tend to think we are the only ones that matter on this planet. My error.

        I happen to believe discussion on any subject is very healthy.
        You have to be brave enough to put an idea out there.
        You have to listen and think about what people are trying to say, even the ones that are not exactly sure of what they want.

        Im not sure what you are trying to say Don, but happy new year anyway.

        • Don Fletcher

          Happy New Year, David

          • David

            Hi Don, I sometimes forget to add context to my ramblings….Punctuation and spelling also take a back seat when transferring my thoughts to paper.

            Nigeria just happened to be one of the models I was using in regards to developing an updated overall set of ‘guiding principles’ On how I view every aspect of ‘everything’; A sort of private mission statement or formula if you will.

            ‘Climate change’ as an example, is an apparent problem that requires a solution and a plan of action, to resolve the problem. You have to apply ‘guiding Principles’ to game out the problem then critically test the results.

            The conversation I would like to have is, what would be the downside of increasing our usable land mass to 200miles from the U.S. Border.

            We could skip over the escarpment leaving that for people to enjoy.

            Transportation could then be increased to encourage people to live further North.

            Affordable housing for young and new Canadians.

            What do you think?

  • Jeremy Skinner

    City Report can be found at:
    https://www.burlington.ca/en/services-for-you/interim-control-bylaw-icbl.asp or
    go to City of Burlington > Services for You > Planning & Development > Interim Control Bylaw

  • Don Fletcher

    I’m quite sure the consultants who pocketed reportedly $600k to recommend “status quo” were not disappointed.

    • Jim Ridley

      Don, it’s hardly a status quo, there are I suppose hundreds of recommended official plan amendments that reflect regional and provincial plans. They also suggest what could be a vibrant city of Burlington that residents could move around with less need for automobiles. I think it’s a welcome forward thinking change.