 By Pepper Parr
September 3, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
The City commissioned a Growth Analysis Study to identify an appropriate level of population and employment growth that can be anticipated for the City between now and 2041. The study findings are intended to help inform the growth analysis work being undertaken by Halton Region through the Integrated Growth Management Strategy (IGMS) by providing a finer grain analysis of the growth opportunities within the City of Burlington.
Some of the numbers that are coming out of the reports put the kind of growth the city could be facing in context: an additional 58,321 to 85,863 people and 22,669 to 53,137 jobs between now and full build out. Full build out is assumed to be post 2041 and represents a conceivable end state where land has been fully optimized.
Assume just two people to a dwelling (and that is quite an assumption) we are looking at between 29 and 42 thousand new dwellings.
That certainly put the 2018 election debate in context.
In 2008, the City undertook an Intensification Study to better understand the intensification opportunities in the City which could accommodate growth to 2031. It was recognized at that time that the City’s supply of Greenfield land was diminishing and a more comprehensive approach to planning for intensification was needed.
 Boundaries set out for the Downtown mobility hub. The study focused on key areas within the City’s urban area and included a site by site analysis to identify opportunities for infilling and redevelopment. This study, which laid out a general framework for longer term growth planning in the City, determined a reasonable estimate of residential units, people and jobs, which could be provided through intensification by 2031. The study also concluded that Burlington was expected to exceed the 40% intensification target in the Growth Plan that is applied Region wide.
The study findings were used to inform the growth analysis work that was undertaken by Halton Region through their Sustainable Halton process, which resulted in population and employment growth forecasts to 2031 as well as intensification and density targets for the City and the other municipalities in the Region.
Halton Region’s Official Plan Review and Integrated Growth Management Strategy
Halton Region is currently undertaking a review of their Official Plan, as required by the Planning Act. The Region’s Official Plan Review (ROPR) commenced in April 2014 and is being undertaken in three phases. Phase one was completed in October 2016 with the completion of a Directions Report which identified the key policy areas for review through the ROPR and established a high level work plan to complete the detailed research and policy development to be undertaken in phases two and three of the ROPR.
 One of the key policy areas identified by the Region is the Integrated Growth Management Strategy (IGMS) which is a growth strategy for the Region to the planning horizon year of 2041 that will incorporate the population and employment forecasts for the Region in accordance with Schedule 3 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The result of the IGMS work will be an updated growth strategy for the Region and its local municipalities which is based on the integration of land use, infrastructure and financial considerations, that conforms to both Provincial and Regional policy directives.
Phase two work on the IGMS began in the spring of 2018 with a kick-off meeting with the local municipalities. Since then, staff have been actively engaged with the Region on the IGMS work through participation on technical committees, attending meetings and workshops as well as providing background data to support the development of the growth scenarios, which were shared with Regional Council on June 19, 2019.
City of Burlington Growth Analysis Study
Recognizing the growth work being undertaken by the Region through the IGMS as a region-wide provincial conformity exercise, City staff saw the opportunity to engage a consultant to undertake growth analysis work at the local level to inform the process at the Region and provide support to City staff and Council in reviewing and providing feedback to the Region on the IGMS work.
Study Process and Work Plan
In the fall of 2018, the City retained Dillon Consulting with support from Watson and Associates to undertake an analysis of the City’s population and employment growth trends to better understand what an appropriate level of population and employment growth might look like for the City between now and 2041. The study findings are intended to inform and support the process being undertaken at the Region by providing a finer grain analysis of growth opportunities in the City and is not intended to supersede the Region’s process. City staff also recognize that components of the growth analysis study could be used or leveraged for other city projects and initiatives.
The project work plan prepared by Dillon and Watson for the growth analysis study included:
• A review of growth related background data;
• A review of the policy context to gain a better understanding of the long-term growth potential for the City;
• Confirmation of the estimated long-term supply of land within the City for residential and non-residential growth;
• An economic, socio-economic and demographic trends analysis which will also include commentary on local factors and economic drivers which are anticipated to influence future residential and non-residential development trends in the City;
• The development of three city-wide population, housing and employment growth forecasts, including the identification of a preferred growth forecast;
• Identifying potential opportunities and challenges associated with the city’s ability to achieve the preferred growth forecast.
A project kick-off meeting was held in the fall of 2018 which included staff from various internal city departments, acting a project steering committee. Various background data related to land use and development was also provided to the consulting team to assist with their review and analysis. In March 2019, a workshop was held with internal city staff which provided the opportunity for the consulting team to share the findings of their analysis and for staff to provide feedback on a draft of the growth analysis study.
Study Purpose & Components
As indicated, the purpose of the Growth Analysis Study is to identify an appropriate level of population and employment growth that the City can anticipate between now and 2041. The study takes into consideration both supply and demand factors while addressing the following key questions:
 Bronte Meadows – designated Employment Lands, the owners, Paletta International, have been trying for years to have it zoned residential. It was part of a package of land in the GTA that was offered to Amazon when they were looking for a new HQ. • How much land supply is there to accommodate future long-term population and employment growth in the City?
• What are some of the recent broader macro-economic and regional growth trends which will influence growth in Burlington?
• What do the City’s recent economic, demographic and real estate trends tell us about future growth potential?
• What is the potential range of population and employment growth that the City can expect between now and 2041 based on available supply and market trends?
• Given the range of potential growth and multiple opportunities for development, what are the phasing considerations for residential and employment growth?
The analysis in this study relies on a number of different sources including components of the City’s adopted Official Plan, Halton Region Official Plan, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe as well as provincial guidelines (e.g. MTO Transit Supporting Guidelines). Data related to the City’s active development applications and building permits was also relied upon to complete the analysis.
Adopted New Official Plan
The Dillon – Watson study recognizes the direction received by Council to undertake a scoped review of the building heights and densities contained within the adopted new Official Plan. The methodology used in the analysis builds upon the urban structure and intensification opportunities identified through the City’s growth framework in the adopted new Official Plan. However, building height permissions in the adopted new Official Plan were not used in the analysis. As such, any changes that result from the scoped re-examination of the adopted new Official Plan are anticipated to be within the supply scenarios tested.
 The Mobility Hubs are on a bit of a hold while the Planning department focuses on a number of critical studies that need to be completed before development can get back on track. Mobility Hub Work
The study also recognizes the work that has been undertaken to date on the Mobility Hubs. For the downtown, the Urban Growth Center boundary and density target established in the Growth Plan were used in the supply analysis, while the population and employment ratios were based on the detailed mobility hub work. Similarly, for the GO Station mobility hubs, two density targets were used in the supply analysis; one reflective of the density target identified in the adopted new Official Plan, while the other reflective of the density target established in the Growth Plan. The population and employment ratios used in the analysis were based on the mobility hub draft precinct plans.
Supply Analysis
A review of the City’s active development applications was completed to inform the analysis of the supply of land available for both residential and non-residential growth. These development applications represent a snap shot in time and reflect development applications ranging from those under review by City staff to those currently under construction.
The supply analysis completed as part of this study helped to understand how much additional growth the City could expect based on current policies and plans. A top-down approach was used to estimate supply by applying a density target (people and jobs/ha) along with population and employment ratios to different areas of the City to identify the full build out potential. However, for some areas of the City which are not anticipated to accommodate much of the new growth, a factor was applied to identify full build out potential.
Full build out is assumed to be post 2041 and represents a conceivable end state where land has been fully optimized.
All this takes place while development work in the downtown core is under a one year freeze that has about five months left before a recommendation comes back from the planners. The Interim Control Bylaw (ICBL) was deemed to be necessary when the city found it was overwhelmed with development applications.
 Planner Jamie Tellier and Director of Planning Heather MacDonald during a city council meeting. Planning Director Heather MacDonald was given the green light to single source the consultants she would use to put together the report. MacDonald has been a planner for at least two decades and she knows all the players in that game. She is firm on the report being in the hands of council within the one year time frame she was given; in our last conversation with MacDonald she made it very clear that meeting the delivery date was paramount – and she doesn’t appear to be one who scrimps on quality.
While the ICBL report is being researched and written the “Adopted Official Plan” is getting a very heavy duty re-write and re-think.
And while that re-write and re-think is taking place there is a group working on plans that attract as much public reaction, response, comment – anything anyone wants to say.
Mayor Meed Ward has made it the thickest of the pillars that hold up her election platform.
She wants to hear – she wants to listen.
The five new City Councillors are in for the hardest assignment they have ever been given. Some are faltering under the work load; some live on this kind of deep policy stuff.
There is a public that depends on the thinking they do and the wisdom they bring to the table.
After a decent summer break – they skipped a July Council meeting – they are now back in the trenches. In seven weeks they will celebrate being elected.
Two of the five (Nisan, Kearns) fought off contenders, one other (Stolte) was a certain winner once it was a clear one on one race with a long term incumbent, the other (Sharman) was an incumbent who won because two women let the vote be split. Another (Bentivegna) won by the slimmest of margins against a candidate who really didn’t run all that much of a campaign. The last newbie (Galbraith) came out on top of a very crowded field.
 Were the right choices made – can the team handle the amount of work they have been given? Time will tell. We will know in the not too distant future if the right choices were made.
There is no doubt that at the Mayoralty level the right choice was made given what was on offer. Only time will tell if the Mayor lives up to the promise.
By Pepper Parr
September 3rd, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
It will be a very full week.
On Monday, the 9th, Council starts off with a daylong meeting that has 8 consent items on the agenda.
Then details on the Provincial Audit and Accountability Fund, that’s the program that has the province coming in to help (tell?) the city how to run their operation.
 Detours that transit buses will take when The Gallery starts demolition and construction opposite city hall.  Cement and dump trucks will come down John Street, slip into the construction site and then leave via James street – passing buses along the way. The Standing Committee will be discussing Open air burning permit areas, a Stormwater management update, the badly needed Construction and Mobility Management Policy. The city got caught a little short-handed on this one; two projects that are expected to be putting up hoardings in the near future met with ward 2 residents and talked about how they would handle the trucks and the traffic on Brant Street opposite city hall and on Lakeshore at Martha. Both locations are going to be construction sites for the next 30 months – at the same time Lakeshore Road is to undergo some serious upgrades that will close it down for up to 8 weeks.
The Strategic Asset Management Policy is going to be discussed, and Consideration for free transit for students will also get discussed.
 The LaSalle Marina just might end up with a very different governance model. Discussion will take place this week. Flooding has been a serious problem. The Marina governance and operating model will be presented – this item will take place in the evening – at 6:30 pm.
 Improvements to the Skyway Arena and community centre are in the works. There was a time when citizens didn’t think they were being heard. They are today. Will they be heard when a decision gets made on the massive development plan yards away from the arena The New Skyway Community Centre will also be discussed during the evening of September 9th.
On Tuesday the 10th council meets as a Standing Committee – Planning and Development this time.
There will be two Statutory Public Meetings; these are public meetings held to present planning applications in a public forum as required by the Planning Act.
One is a rezoning application for the hydro corridor north of 1801 Walker’s Line which staff is recommending be refused.
The second is for an official plan amendment and rezoning application for 2085 Pine Street
Statutory public meeting and recommendation of refusal of rezoning application for the hydro corridor north of 1801 Walker’s Line (PB-16-19)
Both items will be discussed at 6:30 p.m.
The Heritage Burlington 2017/2018 annual report and 2019 objectives is being treated as a consent item.
 Several Council members liked what was being done in Waynesboro – they want staff to look into some better ideas. Traffic management strategies will be discussed at the 9:30am meeting along with Relocation of Bingo Connection and Downtown Streetscape Guidelines. Panhandling on streets in the City of Burlington is to be discussed – this matter often brings out emotional responses from those that delegate.
There will be a Staff direction regarding Airbnb’s and then the Red Tape Red Carpet Task Force recommendations.
This item amounts to much more than a discussion about the Task Force the Mayor set up to hear what stakeholders had to say about how efficient city hall was or wasn’t. Buried within the report is the wish of the Mayor to totally revise the way economic development is done in Burlington.
There will be an Amendment to Nuisance and Noise By-law 19-2003 and results from Halton Regional Police Service’s pilot project to stop noisy moving vehicles
 Council didn’t get a chance to opine on the construction of this parking lot at John and Caroline – it just got done. This Council wants greener parking lots. Green parking lot design guidelines for new parking lot at John and Caroline Streets and future builds. The 2018 – 2022 council has a very green agenda and were upset when the John and Caroline parking lot got opened without any serious consideration to making it a “green” space. Capital Works, the department that oversees and administrates the construction work for the city didn’t see that coming.
Wednesday is an Audit Committee meeting – dry as toast for the most part.
Thursday is a tough one. Members of Council were presented with a 152 page report on what the city is facing in terms of population growth and just where that intensification can or is going to take place.
That will be a special report later in the week.
Related news articles:
Pan handling
Construction site management
Skyway Arena and Community Centre
 By Ray Rivers
August 29th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
There is only one way to describe the experience of driving back from northern Ontario on a long Ontario weekend.
Overwhelming traffic and grid lock! Much like the rest of the free highways around the province, and the GTA in particular most days.
 Pay a fee and you can ride in that left hand lane. So the economist in me wants to cry out road tolls. That’s right. Not only would the cost of tolls ration demand, but the tolls would also raise much needed cash for governments all drowning in deficit financing. That does mean that rich folks could afford to take the highway more often than the poor – and unless there are reasonable options to driving that will get the equity folks all upset.
In fact everyone seems to get upset. Nobody likes toll roads, even if, like the 407, they are relatively painless – get a transponder and the cost goes on your monthly visa bill. And talk about success, that highway is now worth over $30 billion, ten times the value Mike Harris got for it twenty years ago.
When Toronto’s city council wanted to impose some road tolls to help with city finances the Liberal provincial government feared a public backlash in the upcoming election, so nixed it. As it turns out that would hardly have hurt them in their election fortunes.
 Weekend traffic In fact only the Green Party has had the courage to advocate road tolls. The other parties would no more dare to promise tolls, than they would photo radar or another long gun registry. The Wynne Liberals did, however, initiate tolls for driver-only cars using high occupancy lanes (HOV) – thus making them high occupancy or toll (HOT) lanes.
So what are our federal politicians promising to do about cars and congestion as we head to the polls in October to vote for them? The Harper Conservatives had launched a national multi-government infrastructure program as the centre piece of their effort to pull Canada out of the 2008 recession. That effort has been criticized for leaving too much money on the table – more ‘much-ado’ than actually ‘doing’.
As part of their 2015 election campaign the Trudeau Liberals had promised a massive nearly $200 billion, 10 year infrastructure program – increasing Canada’s infrastructure by roughly 20%. But like the Tories before them, they have found it difficult to spend as planned. The money needs to be initiated through application from the responsible jurisdictions and that takes two or more to tango.
One might recall the squabble between the Premier and the PM over the Bombardier transit car layoffs in Thunder Bay. It turns out that Mr. Ford had dropped the ball and failed to apply for the infrastructure money which might have kept the company and its employees working.
 Tolls would pay for infrastructure – which would create jobs. Infrastructure investment is credited with creating over 547,000 jobs in 2017 alone. And job creation was the primary motivation behind the Liberal infrastructure program. Though fewer jobs were actually created than planned, it all helped move Canada to a four decade low rate of unemployment, and away from impending recession as Trudeau came to power.
Roads are high on the list for funding, getting almost a quarter of all that infrastructure money. Of course we can all see that money at work as we navigate our way through construction season. But you don’t have to be in a corn field in Iowa to know that if you build it they will come – no sooner do we finish a new road then it is congested with cars again.
There are an ever increasing number of trucks on the road and some of the blame goes to the wasteful industrial practice of just-in-time parts delivery, where trucks essentially become warehouses on wheels. Then there is the new trend of on-line shopping with free truck delivery to your door.
 No immigration – no traffic congestion. And where do all the cars come from? On going urban sprawl necessitates car ownership and private vehicle commuting. Maxime Bernier would blame congestion on too much immigration. But nobody is listening to him, preferring to label him and his party as racists and keeping that party at the bottom of the polls.
Between 2011 and 2016, almost 30 per cent of immigrants to this country, some 356,930 people, settled in the Toronto census area. Even if only one in four acquired and drives a car that is still almost a hundred thousand cars we’ve added to Toronto area roads during those Harper/Trudeau years.
Elections are a perfect time for trying out new ideas. Kathleen Wynne promised to build some long needed high speed rail in southern Ontario had she won the last election. It is not clear how many drivers would have left their cars at home and shaved a four-plus-hour commute in rush hour down to 73 minutes – but at least they would have been given the option.
The federal government has played a huge role in facilitating the development of transportation in this country, the railways and highways and even pipelines. Isn’t it time for one of the political leaders to come out swinging with a better idea about resolving our road congestion?
 Ray Rivers writes regularly on both federal and provincial politics, applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was once a candidate for provincial office in Burlington. He was the founder of the Burlington citizen committee on sustainability at a time when climate warming was a hotly debated subject. Ray has a post graduate degree in economics that he earned at the University of Ottawa. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
National Infrastructure – More Infrastructure – Even More Infrastructure – Free Highways –
Canadian Immigration – Toronto Immigration – High Speed Rail –
By Pepper Parr
August 23, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Ooops!
A portion of a sentence was left off the paragraph about the pipeline that runs through the centre of the city that was mentioned in the story on the Construction Management procedures that will be in place for the building of the condominium opposite city hall.
In explaining the traffic congestion that was going to take place in the downtown core at the same time two high rise condominiums were to be built we left out the detail about remediation work being done to the pipeline that runs through the city – it carries fuel for aircraft at the Hamilton airport. No specific date on when that work will start.
 Transit traffic will come down Brant and swing onto James and then go south on John.  Cement and dump trucks will come south on John street, drive on to the site and then continue down John to Brant when they have off loaded The public was told that Lakeshore Road will close for a period of time while repair work on the surface is done.
Detail on what the flow of traffic would be during the 30 month construction period that The Gallery, the 23 story condominium that will be built opposite city hall, was released.
Cement trucks and dump trucks will compete with buses and private automobile for room on Brant, John and James Street.
 An aerial rendering of how the condominium will fit into the corner of Brant and James – with city hall across the street. It will be interesting to see how the Santa Claus parade winds its way through that part of the city in December.
By Pepper Parr
August t 22nd, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
 Lisa Kearns waiting for a question from the audience. Lisa Kearns, Councillor for ward 2 was back before her constituents again – it was the second week in a row that she stood before an audience and took them through the intricacies of Construction Management and Traffic control during construction projects..
Last week the meeting was related to the Adi Nautique development at the corner of Lakeshore and Marsha where the audience learned that the construction timeline is about 30 months.
This time it was the Carnacelli development opposite city hall – where the time line is 30 months. The 23 storey development, known commercially as The Gallery also has a new address – because the entrance is going to be on James they are using the municipal address of 2011 James to identify the development – not to confuse people who follow this type of thing.
 The property to the left of the site has been approved for 17 storeys – they have appealed asking for 23 stories to match The Gallery development. The Centro Garden is on the extreme right. The two developments are less than a km apart and will be under construction at about the same time.
Carriage Gate, the developers of the project, announced that they expect to begin demolition sometime immediately after Labour Day.
At about the same tine Lakeshore Road will be closed for a period of between eight and twelve weeks for road improvement work.
The audience was also advised that a pipeline that runs right through the city coming in from the Beachway along Elgin Street and running through the rear of the Mayrose Tayco property at the north end of the Elizabeth Street parking lot is scheduled to have some major remediation done – no specific dates were given.
Chaos is the word that best describes what is going to take place in the city.
The objective is to manage that chaos as professionally as possible. Kearns was in the room explain that everything was going to be fine – there were protocols and procedures in place to handle every situation.
Drawings were displayed showing where the trucks that will haul away the material from the demolished site and where the concrete trucks would be staged while they were waiting to enter the site, disgorge the concrete and move on so that the next truck could come in.
Cement and dump truck movement plan. Transit movement plan. The public will not lose the use of the Brant Street or James Street – the areas where construction is taking place will be covered so that pedestrians are safe.
Kearns assured the audience that she would be on top of it all – her office on the eighth floor of city hall overlooks the site.
Concern about the noise, the dust and the traffic flow were not as important as to where the trades people working on the site were going to park. The Carnacelli interests on the property the Berkeley was built on and the land to the north where there was to be a parking lot and a medical building that would front on Caroline – that space will be used for parking in the early stages. Mark Bales who is overseeing the project did announce that the corporation had arranged to rent about 40 parking spots from the city – which didn’t go down all that well with the area residents or those with retail operations in the immediate area.
 Timeline for the construction and completion of The Gallery opposite city hall. People wanted to know how many trucks would be in the area – they were told seven to nine which was later bumped up to 12. They will be driving in and out of the site from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm.
The audience was told that there could be anywhere between seven and seventy workers on the site at any one time.
Kearns has worked with Transportation department people and has, she said, gone as high as the City Manager to resolve some of the issues. The City is in the process of creating a Construction Management Plan that will be in place for future developments.
Kearns said that given the developments that are in line at the Planning department the city is looking at three, five perhaps even seven years of downtown construction.
There then came a point in the meeting when Kearns decided all the questions had been asked and answered and it was time to wrap it up.
The audience got the “bums rush” and those who had questions could hang around.
 By Staff
August 13th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
One of the beauties of an on line newspaper is the opportunity to look at the back and forth in communication between two people.
In what follows we give you a look at how David Barker’s electronic conversation with Burlington MPP Jane McKenna went.
 Barker, a Lakeshore Road resident, takes issue with Jane McKenna’s position on affordable housing. She basically sticks as close as possible to the Ford government position- something Jane has always done. She knew the lines to the Tim Hudak position on significant issues better than Tim Hudak did when he was PC party leader.
Have a listen to how McKenna digs a hole and then looks for ways to dig down even deeper.
David Barker to Jane McKenna June 22nd, 2019
On Sat., Jun. 22, 2019, 11:25 a.m. Barker wrote:
Ms McKenna in your statement directed towards the We Love Burlington group, published in the Burlington Gazette, you state “Our estimates from the Ministry of the Attorney General show that over 100,000 housing units are caught up in legacy cases at the tribunal. That’s 100,000 desperately needed homes that can’t get built – or three years worth of construction in Ontario waiting for approval….” By making this statement, Ms McKenna, you imply that you would expect all 100,000 units that await review by LPAT would gain its approval.
Maybe you did not mean to imply that. But your statement reflects exactly the public’s perception of just what is wrong with LPAT (and before it OMB). The perception is that the unelected, unrepresentative body seems to invariably side with the developer’s position, completely ignoring the municipality’s official plan and the desires of the local residents.
Please can you provide any justification as to why the Province of Ontario should even have an unelected, unrepresentative body to pass judgement on how a municipality manages its development. As far as I am aware no other Canadian Province has such a body. I assume in those other Provinces the developer’s recourse is to a non-political court system. Should that not also be the recourse here in Ontario?
Surely if a municipality has an official plan that has been accepted and approved by its region (and by implication the Province) why should that municipality then be second guessed by an unelected, unrepresentative political body. If a developer’s proposal does not comply with the requirements of the municipality’s (Region/ Province approved) official plan, then surely the developer should not expect municipal plan approval until it does conform.
My understanding is the official plan in effect in Burlington dates back to 2008. That means the official plan has been in effect for ten years NOT twenty five years as you contend. That 2008 official plan, although soon to be superceded by an updated official plan, does in fact remain compliant with regional and Provincial requirements. As such it should be respected by all, including developers, the Province and LPAT.
Ms McKenna you are right to champion the need to increase the supply of affordable housing, both rental and owned. I believe you will find allies for that goal at the Region, at Burlington City Council and in the community. However, the high rise condo developments proposed for downtown Burlington do not in any meaningful way address affordable housing. The price point of the proposed condos are way outside the affordability of first time home buyers. Further the monthly rental cost of those units being bought by investors for the rental market is also likely to be well beyond the budgets of the twenty somethings who look for affordable rental accommodation. So for you, Ms McKenna, to in any way imply that the developers proposals for downtown Burlington high rises address affordable housing is completely disingenuous on your part.
Please, Ms McKenna would you temper your standing up and defending the bullying Ford government, of which you are a part, with more standing up and advocating for the desires and positions of your constituents who elected you to represent them. Those views are clearly and accurately expressed and advocated by the City of Burlington Council.
I dare you to publish on your website this opposing view to your statement. But I doubt you are either brave enough or confident enough to do that.
Barker to McKenna June 30th.
I’m looking forward to your response to my emailed message below.
McKenna to Barker August 7th.
Mr. Barker,
Every community in Ontario is unique. But no matter where you go, one thing is the same – people are looking for housing that meets their needs and their budget.
Here in Burlington, the cost of buying a home is becoming out of reach for many and affordable rentals are too hard to find. In addition, the high cost of housing is making it harder to attract investment and create jobs.
According to 2017 projections by Ontario’s Ministry of Finance, Halton Region will grow by 56.2 percent over the next 22 years – making Halton the fastest-growing area in the GTHA. That’s why we need to get the housing supply right – the right housing, in the right place, at the right time in the most efficient way.
Provincial growth plans have determined land use patterns for over a century. Regional and Municipal Official Plans align to provincial policy and are used in planning local communities.
Ontario is not the only province that handles appeals involving municipal planning decisions with a Tribunal. Like Ontario, Alberta is also home to some of the fastest growing cities in Canada; they also handle municipal planning with a tribunal.
The tribunal exists because people don’t always agree on how their communities should develop or change. Disputes often arise over land use planning issues, such as where industry is located, where roads and transit are built, protecting environmentally sensitive lands and managing overall development. When people are unable to resolve their differences on planning issues or have disputes with their municipal council, the LPAT provides a forum to resolve those disputes.
Recently, Halton Regional Council passed a motion calling on the government to eliminate the LPAT. Unfortunately, this is not an option as it would remove the ability for residents to appeal Council decisions outside the courts. Relying on our over-burdened court system would increase costs, delay decision making and hinder people’s ability to settle planning disputes.
Our government’s recent decision to appoint 11 new adjudicators to the LPAT will speed-up decision making to address the 2 to 3-year backlog of appeals.
As Burlington works to create a new Official Plan, our Mayor and Council continue to receive expert advice from local and provincial planning staff. That’s why I’m confident that by mid-2020, under a new Official Plan, the number of appeals will be reduced, with the LPAT playing an important role in ensuring critical checks and balances are in place.
Best regards,
Jane
Barker gets back to McKenna before the end of the day on August 7th.
Thank you for your email below. Its contents do raise further questions in my mind, which you might be able to answer or comment upon.
I totally agree with you that so much more needs to be done to provide the “affordable” housing that is needed for the less well off in our society. The main hurdle to achieving that goal is that it does not make commercial or economic sense for developers to create affordable housing when ROI is so much better with condos and single family homes. Ontario should look to other jurisdictions outside of Canada where local, regional and central governments provide the affordable housing stocks. It is nonsense and folly to believe the private sector will step up. Doug Ford, the Premier for the People” surely would want to champion a Housing for the People initiative funded through the three levels of government.
I would hazard a guess that of the 100,000 units you have cited as being held up at OMB/LPAT less than 5% would relate to applications for affordable housing developments. Perhaps you have a supportable number for this?
Those applications for multi unit developments in Burlington tied up at OMB/LPAT, I am confident are all for $500,000+ condos or similar price point developments. Not for affordable housing.
Tying the affordable housing issue to the purpose or need for an OMB/LPAT body is not appropriate or valid.
You say, once Burlington, or any other municipality, gets its OP compliant with Provincial requirements the number of instances of appeals being accepted for adjudication by LPAT will be substantially reduced. That being the case why could a dedicated Property Planning Court not be created to deal with the appeals.
Surely it is better to have an independent judiciary act as the arbiter rather than an unelected body of political or patronage appointees, who likely have no connection to the municipality. If a separate Property Planning Court is a no go, then why not have a requirement that the LPAT tribunal members must be resident in the municipality from which the matter emanates.
You cite cost as being an insurmountable hurdle that rules out the use of the courts as a viable place to settle disputes. The cost to appeal a municipality’s decision to LPAT likely puts an appeal out of the financial wherewithal of individual residents. Lawyers, planning consultants and other expert type witnesses are required, all costing a pretty penny. Developers have deep pockets. Individuals do not. A “small claims court” type model for a Property Planning focused court should be the way to go.
You have cited Alberta as another province with an LPAT type system. So perhaps you can elaborate as to how other provinces deal with planning disagreements. What happens in say BC, Quebec, Nova Scotia. Can Ontario not learn anything from those provinces?
You mention Halton recently passed a resolution calling for the end of LPAT. The regional and city council’s were more recently elected to office than were MPPs. Your words come across like those of an overly protective or controlling mother telling her child “no, don’t bother your pretty little head with that, Mommy knows what’s best”.
Might I suggest in the next month or so you host a constituency meeting on this subject so that you can hear directly from your constituents on this subject.
David Barker
Jane gets back to Barker on August 12th
Mr. Barker,
Thank you for your follow up email including your suggestions.
Best regards,
Jane
Barker gets back to Jane – he is like a dog with a bone and he isn’t letting go.
Jane:
You are most welcome.
 Will you be offering your thoughts or comments as to those suggestions:-
* a “small claims” model type court for municipal property planning disputes be set up to replace LPAT.
* an LPAT tribunal be comprised only of citizens resident in the municipality from which the matter emanates.
* you hold a townhall meeting within the next couple of months to have an open discussion on this matter, which is of immensely high interest to your constituents.
* have the Province and municipalities come together to finance, construct, hold and manage a stock of affordable housing.
I look forward to hearing from you.
David Barker
Blair Smith, a citizen’s advocate adds his two cents:
If the Government really wanted to increase affordable housing then it would act as responsible governments do – as stewards of the public trust – and mandate that developers do much, much more to provide housing that applies. If you leave it to the private sector with incentive programs and self-regulating regimens then your last name may be Wynn. Government is intended to fill the gap where private sector and self-interest will not go. Not a difficult concept.
By Ray Rivers
August 6th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Ever since I can remember environmentalists have been demanding an end to government subsidies for the oil and gas sectors. And ever since I can remember governments have been ignoring the issue, or have been in denial. And those not in denial keep making promises to end the flow of cash to the energy giants, but never actually do.
 Sustainable for who? Canada by everyone’s calculations leads the G7 when it comes to doling out cash to the fossil fuel industry. And while the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) puts the direct value of Canadian generosity to big fossil at $3.3 billion per year, the International Monetary Fund calls it more like $50 billion after all the externalities are included.
Mr. Trudeau, recognizing the inappropriateness of these subsidies, and echoing long standing Liberal policy, promised during the last federal election that he would eliminate this gravy train. Then he made a similar promise when his government purchased the TransMountain (TMX) pipeline. The NDP, like the Liberals, utter wishful thoughts on the matter, but the national reality just won’t let that happen – at least not yet.
Canada’s is a diverse economy, and three or four provinces rely heavily on the oil and gas sector for their standard of living. And demand for petroleum is still strong. So ending the subsidies would appear as an attack on those provinces and the national economy. Besides there is still some small chance that the Liberals or NDP might win some seats in the prairies.
The Greens are probably the only party which could be counted on to end the freeload, though the probability of them becoming government in the near future is pretty slim – so it’s an easy promise to make. Maxime Bernier’s fledgling People’s Party shuns all subsidies and has criticized the most recent federal gift to the oil execs. But then given current polling he has even a lesser chance of forming government than the Greens, let alone keeping his own seat.
 The sign says it all. Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives are the outliers. Despite criticism of Trudeau on the latest handout to the industry, nobody should doubt where Scheer stands. He represents oil producing Saskatchewan, after all, and like his former boss, Alberta’s Harper, can be counted on to do the bidding of the oil giants.
In fact his recent policy paper on climate change and the environment would see even more subsidies go out to fossil fuel firms presumably looking for cleaner ways of burning even more fossil fuels. He stands shoulder to shoulder with big oil, regurgitating their positions on the new fuel standard and environmental assessment. And his opposition to the carbon tax is all about protecting the oil producers.
But if climate change is the most important issue facing humanity this century, then fossil fuels will have to go, and fossil fuel companies will have to shut down eventually. And alternatives need to be available and put on an even footing financially. According to the IISD, globally, the fossil fuel fellows get four times as much in handouts ($400 billon) as does the worldwide renewable energy sector.
Bernier is dead wrong. Subsidies are an essential part of modern government. They are as essential as fair taxation. If government’s role in society is to provide leadership then it must use all of its tools to tip the scales and nudge us in the right direction. For example, the recently announced federal electric vehicle rebate program helps to level the costs of purchasing a non-polluting vehicle.
 The Hamilton skyline on a difficult day. Subsidies to the oil industry are wrong headed and must and will end. Otherwise how do we move society off oil and gas and onto cleaner electric or hydrogen. The federal carbon tax is expected to raise $2.3 billion this year, all of which will be returned to the public. And that is still at least a billion shy of what the Canadian taxpayers are giving to the oil companies, so they can compensate their oil exec’s with fat salaries, bonuses and stock options. And their product is the poison changing our climate.
Ray Rivers writes regularly on both federal and provincial politics, applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was once a candidate for provincial office in Burlington. He was the founder of the Burlington citizen committee on sustainability at a time when climate warming was a hotly debated subject. Ray has a post graduate degree in economics that he earned at the University of Ottawa. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
Subsidies for Fossil Fuels – More Subsidies – Canadian Subsidies – Highest Subsidizes in G7 –
 By Staff
August 6th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
A Community Lens report from Community Development Halton sets out just what homelessness is.
What is homelessness? According to the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness, homelessness is “the situation of an individual, family, or community, without stable, safe, permanent, appropriate housing, or the immediate prospect means and ability of acquiring it.” The homeless population is hard to count because of their mobility and the cyclical nature of homelessness.
Homelessness isn’t a huge problem in Halton; 271 individuals/head of household experiencing homelessness were identified in 2018 compared to 264 in 2016.
The first coordinated Point-in-Time (PiT) Count of homelessness in Canada took place in 2016 covering 32 communities. The second count that took place in 2018 included 62 communities. Halton Region participated in both Point-in-Time counts.
 Within the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), Halton ranks third after the City of Toronto and Peel Region in terms of the homeless rate (per 100,000 residents).
 In Halton, over half of the homeless individuals stayed in transitional housing (38%) and shelters (27%). Oakville has the highest rate of homelessness (65.5 persons/100,000 residents) followed by Burlington at 40.9 persons/100,000 residents, in terms of rate of homelessness (per 100,000 residents) in 2018.
Many factors are at play that result in an individual or head of a household to experience homelessness. Homelessness is usually the result of the cumulative effects of a number of factors such as family conflict, job loss, or unaffordable housing. Based on the two Point-in-Time surveys (2016 and 2018), family conflict ranks as the top reason(s) for homelessness.
Family conflict includes conflict or poor relationship between parents and children, physical violence, or sexual abuse. Lack of affordable housing is another top reason for homelessness. Job loss and precarious employment can easily lead to homelessness. Less than one-quarter (24%) of the homeless individuals are employed. Another reason for homelessness is those fleeing domestic violence which includes physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current/former partner or spouse as well as by other family members, or by a partner’s family member.
 Whatever the reason for the homelessness, adequate support needs to be in place ensure that dignity, well-being and a road out of homelessness are in place for anyone who needs the help.
The oft heard phrase “Get a job” is not the answer to the homelessness problem.
Community Lens is prepared by Community Development Halton to disseminate and interpret important community data as it becomes available. For more information please contact CDH at data@cdhalton.ca or 905-632-1975
 By Staff
August 1st, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
 It’s the Civic Holiday this weekend; a number of administrative services will be closed on Monday, Aug. 5, 2019, reopening Tuesday, Aug. 6, 2019.
City Hall will be closed on Monday, Aug. 5, reopening on Tuesday, Aug. 6.
Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities
Activities and customer service hours at city pools, arenas and community centres vary over the holiday weekend. Please visit burlington.ca/play for a complete listing of program times and burlington.ca/servicehours for hours at customer service locations.
Burlington Transit
Burlington Transit will operate holiday service schedule and the administration office and Specialized Dispatch will be closed on Monday, Aug. 5, reopening on Tuesday, Aug. 6. Visit burlingtontransit.ca for more information.
Animal Shelter and Control
Closed Monday, Aug. 5. Open 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Saturday. For more information or to report an animal control-related emergency, call 905-335-3030 or visit burlington.ca/animals.
Roads, Parks and Forestry
The administrative office will be closed on Monday, Aug. 5, reopening on Tuesday, Aug. 6. Only urgent services will be provided.
Halton Court Services
Provincial Offences Courts will be closed on Monday, Aug. 5, reopening on Tuesday, Aug. 6.
Parking
Free parking is available in the downtown core at all pay machines located on the street, municipal lots and the parking garage on weekends and holidays.
NOTE: The Waterfront parking lots (east and west) do not provide free parking on statutory holidays.
Do you have family and friends visiting for the holiday weekend? A reminder that there is no parking on city streets overnight between 1 and 6 a.m. Exemptions to allow overnight parking on city streets may be obtained by calling 905-335-7844 or visiting burlington.ca/parking. You can get a permit on line.
Fireworks Safety
A reminder from the Burlington Fire Department: the safest way to enjoy fireworks this Civic Holiday is to let the professionals handle the lighting and fireworks display. If you do have fireworks planned for your celebrations, please follow safety tips at: burlington.ca/fireworks.
 A n aboriginal boy demonstrated using hoops at the Brant Day event at LaSalle Park  The August Civic holiday – best way to spend it.
 By Staff
July 30th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
A devoted Gazette reader popped us a note. “You might want to read this over and perhaps share it.” The article, which is rather long, is on the value (or lack thereof) of public engagement.
Ruben Anderson wrote the piece on August 6, 2018. He mentions an article with the headline – “Most Public Engagement is Worthless” which he said grabbed his attention.
That article launched Anderson’s thoughts.
“I think most public engagement is beyond worthless. I think it actually corrodes the relationships we need in order to build a strong town. Most public engagement, as it is currently conducted, makes our cities worse places.
 Finance department staff explaining a part of a budget during a public forum. “Does this mean that I am saying we should abandon public engagement? Most definitely not. But I think we need to understand behavior, relationships, and expertise a lot better if we are going to do good with our consultation efforts instead of harm. Public engagement needs to be done well, because it would be better to do nothing at all than to corrode the public’s trust in City Hall and in each other.
Let me tell you a story.
I was working for the City of Vancouver’s Sustainability Group and was assigned to a large urban planning process. Consultation was said to be critical, necessary, jugular—and so we dog-and-ponied with our flip charts and sticky notes and dotmocracy.
We asked people the question, “How could Vancouver be more sustainable?”
Solar Panels! they told us. Windmills! Plant trees! Ban plastic bags! Ride bikes!
Golly. Solar panels?
Here I am working in a Sustainability Department and I never thought of solar panels. How could I have missed that? Solar panels! And bikes? Wow. Just wow. What a fool I was! My eyes are opened!
What I am trying to describe here is how terribly insulting this process was to everybody involved.
We had asked a question that could produce nothing but disrespect for the experts who have dedicated their education and careers to reducing environmental impact. Of course we knew about solar panels.
And we had asked a question that the members of the general public were not equipped to answer, because they aren’t experts. There are some good reasons why solar panels are not installed faster—it is almost always a better idea to insulate your home, weatherstrip and draught-proof first. You reduce your own energy demand before you put on solar panels.
 Jennifer Johnson on the left listening to a residents ideas at Lakeside Plaza visioning exercise. When the report and recommendations come out, the public sees nothing that resembles what they asked for—they wanted solar panels and they got weatherstripping. They too feel disrespected. They gave their irreplaceable time, hours from their one and only life, and look what they got.
They had to give something up in order to come to the consultation, and nothing good came of their time because they weren’t asked questions they could meaningfully contribute to answering.
This is not how you build a trusting relationship: a strong foundation on which to work together. This is how you corrode trust.
Another story: the city I now live in, Victoria, BC, recently began installing “all ages and abilities” bike lanes after a significant consultation period. At a couple of the consultations, big maps were laid out so people could draw where they thought bike routes should go.
If you’re having the public draw bike lanes, think about why. What expertise do they have that your bike planners don’t?
 Does the clearly coloured bike lane make it safer? Only if car drivers are aware of why the colouring is in place. To be quite blunt, if your bicycle transportation planner does not have a very clear idea what routes would balance geography, access, cost, safety, behavior change, etc. then they are incompetent and should be fired.
If your planner is not incompetent, then they are probably well-read on the past couple of decades of practical experimentation with bike infrastructure. They probably know the current best thinking on the sorts of places bike lanes should connect and serve. They have probably seen a hundred examples of creative solutions to integrating bikes into cities. They have been paid by the city to learn these things, and probably have done a bunch more research on their own because they are transportation geeks.
So the public was asked to come in and draw routes. The public doesn’t know anything about how many dollars per kilometer each option costs. They don’t know about lane widths, and how wide the city right-of-way is. They know nothing about other things that may be important, like planned changes in sidewalks, utilities, and developments.
We ask people who have none of the education, experience or knowledge needed to make proper decisions to come in and draw routes, and we ask the City staff to sit there and be polite at the ridiculousness that pours out. Can you imagine how the staff feel about giving up their evening with their family, after a day’s work, to go be polite to people who are unaware of virtually all the limiting factors?
And so the public input is ignored, which in this case is the right thing, and the public feels abused, disrespected, undervalued and duped, which also seems like the logical outcome of the consultation.
What Are We Trying to Do?
I really mean this question. What are we trying to do when we do public engagement?
Why are all these people in this room? What are we trying to accomplish? Before we gather people for public consultation, we need to be clear and honest about what we are trying to do. Then, if consultation is the right solution, we can design a process to fill that need.
Are we trying to get ideas?
Our culture loves Ideas! We have Idea Jams! Idea City! TED Talks!
 Bob Wingfield, a long time Burlington resident differing with former ward 4 Councillor Jack Dennison. Lack of ideas is almost never the problem, as I have argued elsewhere. The problems we face are usually a lack of social cohesion or a lack of money—and a lack of money often also indicates a lack of social cohesion; not enough people care about the project to tolerate a tax increase to pay for it.
Even if we did need more ideas, consultation doesn’t work to generate them. I have a degree in Industrial Design, so I actually took classes in generating ideas. As a working designer I had to constantly generate new ideas. I can tell you, there is not much of a worse way to generate ideas than to put a bunch of strangers with competing interests who are untrained in brainstorming techniques into a room for three hours.
Are we trying to build social license?
Superficial exercises like dot-voting often fail to respect and take advantage of the expertise of either professionals or the public, and leave both feeling insulted. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons)
Maybe. One of the knee-jerk responses every planner is familiar with is “There was no consultation.” So, putting out a plate of stale cookies and setting up a sad dot-voting exercise neuters that response. Maybe there was nothing consultative about it, but the sign in the hall said “Public Consultation This Way,” so I guess there must have been a consultation.
Bringing many people with different goals together behind one project is quite a big task. Clearly a real program to build social license would take a lot more time and care than your average public meeting. Planners know how to hold value-based discussions, but I don’t know that I have ever seen them use that skill in the processes I have been involved in.
If you need to build social license, maybe you should throw street parties; have a barbecue.
Are we trying to acknowledge people?
I have come to think that engagement tries to acknowledge the public’s plaintive cry, “Don’t forget me.” I think people often don’t need to win; they just don’t want to be forgotten. But as I described above, the outcomes of our processes sure look like they were forgotten.
I wonder what it would be like if the design team went through the plan inch by inch, narrating the compromises, costs and failures, the choices they made, and the specific comments from participants. “Albert and Ruth, who live in Fairfield, are concerned that we expand the songbird habitat. We did that by specifying different landscaping from the typical pom-pom tree and grass lawn. The west side is a native plant garden, intended to be wild and seldom entered by people.”
Are we trying to let off steam?
Issues sometimes get contentious, and letting people vent and feel heard seems like a valid goal—it is just that our public meetings often seem to do the opposite. They actually increase tension instead of releasing it. How could we vent most effectively? Could we play dodgeball? I mean literal dodgeball, where we try to smoke the people we disagree with as hard as we can with a fast-moving ball.
I understand that dodgeball does not resolve what we think of as city planning issues—but neither does the current model of public consultation. And the current model often increases tension between parties, whereas at least dodgeball would dissipate some of it. So there is a very real, serious case to be made that dodgeball would produce better outcomes from our consultations than any amount of sticky notes and dotmocracy ever will.
That is a sad commentary.
Misplaced Expertise
It is clear the public is dissatisfied with much public engagement, and do not feel they were actually listened to.
In the Facebook comments on Chuck’s article, Nancy Graham said “A lot of [consultation] is simply for show and to pretend you are being heard when the leaders have already decided the results they want.”
 An unhappy transit user letting Director of Transportation and former Mayor Rick Goldring know what he thinks. Why would leaders do what they want? Sure, maybe for self-interest and personal profit in some cases. But perhaps it’s generally because they think they know better and are trying to make the world a better place. This belief is not unfounded; presumably, they have years of education and on-the-job experience and privileged knowledge of the tricky terrain of this particular troubling issue.
Expertise is unfashionable right now, partly because our society is not very good at understanding who is expert at what, so we give too much power to some people and not enough power to others.
One of the most enduringly popular Strong Towns articles is Chuck’s Confessions of a Recovering Engineer, in which he lambasts his younger self and his former profession in rich detail. He describes how he would arrogantly ruin neighborhoods and destroy streets, thanks to his confidence that his asphalt was for the better. He was the expert.
He was an expert in engineering, who ruined the place. Citizens were promised something better, but what they got was something worse.
And most of our cities have many Chuck 1.0s. Many of us live in cities that were impaled with freeways through the core. We travel on streets that are unsafe by design. The sense of place does not show up in engineering standards manuals.
And yet it would be silly to break out the dotmocracy to specify how to repave a road. It doesn’t matter how you feel about finely crushed rock compacted in the base layer; it matters how it performs with vehicles on it.
Engineers should be expert in the strength of materials and construction methods. They are in no way expert in human behavior, nor are they experts in public opinion. They should not be making political decisions or urban design decisions.
The engineer’s role, which has grown to have so much influence in so many cities, should really be quite technical and fairly powerless. They should have the job of implementing decisions made by others, and within that, their expertise for materials and construction should be completely respected. They are the experts at that.
Sadly, we don’t see residents as experts. This is a critical and corrosive mistake. Of course, they certainly are not experts in how to reduce greenhouse gases, or pave roads, or pick bike routes. They should not be picking beams for a bridge.
But citizens of a city do know how the built environment makes them feel, and how they would like to feel.
They are experts in how increasing taxes will stress them out. They are experts in hidden secrets of their streets and alleys. They are experts in the amenities they want for themselves and their family. They are the only experts.
Their expertise should be respected.
 Beachway residents looking at early maps “We should only consult with residents when they are the ones that can best answer the question at hand. But in those moments, they should be treated as the experts they are.”
One of the most impactful examples of this I have seen comes from when Oregon had single-payer medicine and was trying to ensure tax dollars were spent most effectively. Experts rated every medical procedure and pharmaceutical by its cost and the quality of life it gave, then ranked them from best to worst. Right up at the top was treatment for pneumonia, and at the bottom was life support for babies born without a brain.
And then they added up the medical costs and the current tax revenue, and drew a line on the list where the tax dollars ran out.
Medical experts made the list of treatments. And then residents—experts in the impact of sickness on their family and community, and experts in their personal budget—got to decide what should be covered.
Essentially, the public got to choose how many people would die. Would you like to cover more procedures? Simple, just pay more taxes. Should we spend one million dollars per year keeping an 80 year-old alive? Nope.
And so the line is adjusted.
What Chuck describes in “Confessions of a Recovering Engineer” is that the choice of how many shall die on our roads has been delegated to engineers, who prioritize speed over life. That is wrong. Engineers are not qualified to make that choice. Only the citizens are experts in how many funerals they would like to attend each year, and how much tax they are able or want to pay—and it turns out they prioritize safety over speed.
So far I have talked about engineer experts and resident experts. But in his latest article, Chuck also talked a lot about design, referencing Steve Jobs. In fact, commenter Kevin Adam noted the similarities between Chuck’s article and corporate Design Thinking.
As I mentioned, I have a degree in design and worked as a product designer—so naturally I think design is incredibly important. Designers bring a different expertise to the equation that residents and engineers typically don’t have.
The old joke about the iPhone is that if you asked people what they wanted in a telephone, they would have said, “Longer cords.” That is the product of a worthless consultation.
So to avoid that, Chuck says, “get on with the hard work of iteratively building a successful city. That work is a simple, four-step process:”
Humbly observe where people in the community struggle.
Ask the question: What is the next smallest thing we can do right now to address that struggle?
Do that thing. Do it right now.
Repeat.
Let me reframe this list as a design process.
1. Humbly observe where people in the community struggle.
Almost every word here is pure gold so I am going to break it down.
Humbly…
Arrogant, rock-star designers may be fine for chairs or blenders, but as I have already said, only the residents are experts on living in their city. To get good outcomes, the designer must approach with humility, in service of the city and its people.
…observe…
Asking people what they want is often very ineffective. Most people aren’t trained to imagine seemingly impossible things, like a stylish supercomputer that fits in your pocket.
Good public opinion pollsters have to distill opinions out using oblique questions and the discernment that comes with years of experience. Angus McAllister, CEO of McAllister Opinion Research, said, “Most consultation and opinion research is like eating a Big Mac—empty, unhealthy and dissatisfying.
Humans are poor at noticing the drivers of our own behavior. We often behave for one reason, and then seek an explanation for why we acted that way. Typically we just pick something reasonable-sounding even if it is totally unrelated.
For example, if you ask someone why they come to a certain café, they may respond that it has lots of parking. So, if you remove the parking and they keep coming, you know parking is a post hoc rationalization. In fact, they like the way the light falls on the patio, or the service, or the smell reminds them of their grandparents’ kitchen.
Changing the parking is a design prototype. Nothing happens? Change it back and do something different. It is not just whole projects that need to be iterative; the stages within a project also benefit from iteration.
So good designers have to ask lots of careful questions, but observing behavior is critical. You can ask people what route they walk, but when you observe the paths worn through the grass, you have real data.
…where people in the community struggle.
We hold up Gods of Technology like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, but they are solving their own problems—rich tech bro problems. They don’t care about sidewalks or corner stores; they have driverless cars and drone delivery!
2. Ask the question: What is the next smallest thing we can do right now to address that struggle?
A Strong Towns principle is that it is less risky to make many small bets than one huge gamble. It is also often strategic, because it is much easier to get permission to do a small thing.
From a design perspective, it is easier to manufacture a spoon than it is to build a kitchen mixer with hundreds of parts—but both can whip up a cake.
3. Do that thing. Do it right now.
Actually, before you do the thing, I would like to add one more step.
2b. From a design perspective, it would sure be awesome if you would collect some data first, to test your Theory of Change.
Here are some Theories of Change:
If we paint a bike lane here, more people will ride bikes.
If we narrow this road, cars will drive slower.
If we widen this highway, we will eliminate congestion.
So, when we plan our interventions, we are using a Theory of Change—whether we have stated it or not—and it is important to collect data to test your Theory of Change.
Collecting data can be very tricky. For example, if you stripe a bike lane, you may see more bikes on that road. Are they new cyclists, or did the same old cyclists just change routes? If your goal is more cyclists, that matters.
So, collect data that will actually test your Theory of Change. As far as I am concerned, the number of hits on your website is generally useless data. We want to count real world change.
3. NOW you do the thing.
Do the thing, then observe. What actually happens in the real world? What do people do—not what do they say, what do they do? Do they drive slower, ride more, shop locally, add a basement suite, plant a tree—whatever. What do they do?
This lesson is one of my favorite from design school. What people do is the only measure that matters. My teacher said, “The users tell you what your design is.”
 Did the public have any input in the design of this bench. Did the people who approved the design every sit on the bench? Imagine you have designed an amazing bench—but nobody sits on it. The skateboarders, however, love it.
Well, then you have not designed a bench, you have designed a skate feature. It doesn’t matter what you think you are designing, it matters how people use it.
I hope you find this to be liberating. If you are struggling with a doorknob, or a toaster, or a sound system or your car’s windshield wipers, it is not your fault, it is just bad design. Bask in this insight while you scroll through Gracen Johnson’s sad collection of design failures, #PlacesIDontWantToSit.
So collect the data, and compare it to your Theory of Change. Did it work, or is your theory garbage? If it is garbage, it is a relief you only made a small bet.
4. Repeat.
“Good designers have to ask lots of careful questions, but observing behavior is critical. You can ask people what route they walk, but when you observe the paths worn through the grass, you have real data.”
Collect data and observe the results, because it is a drag to keep repeating the same mistake over and over again. Watch what works, and repeat that.
Now, in this list, consultation just disappears, and I think that is a bit hasty. I think the design experts should humbly observe where the community is struggling—but where do you start observing?
 Blowing off steam – certainly not communicating. This is when you ask the experts. Consultation can map hot spots. Consultation can prioritize which hot spots to address first. If you need to know how it feels to live in a city, where the friction points are, and what is most beloved and cherished, residents are the only experts. Design a consultation to harvest their expertise, and then act on what they give you.
Consultation is a very small part of the overall process, but can be useful and important.
We need to be more aware of different kinds of expertise, and who has it. Each expert—engineer, resident, or designer—only specializes in a narrow field, and we mustn’t ask them to do each other’s jobs.
Otherwise, we disrespect everybody involved, and we corrode goodwill and trust on all sides.
By Pepper Parr
July 29th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Despite a year of significant upheaval in the Planning department – staff are now working on several critical reports with tight time frames – and developing ways to include the public in the process on an ongoing basis and not when it is all wrapped up.
Planning staff are well into the Work Plan for the scoped re-examination of the Adopted Official Plan.
It is a mammoth task that has to be done right if Mayor Marianne Meed Ward is to meet the mandate the public gave her in October.
 City planner, Heather MacDonald , on the right, in conversation with Blair Smith The Planning and Development Committee set out what the Department of City Building is expected to get done during the summer.
Along with the re-examination of the Adopted Official Plan the City Building Department has to figure out just what they want to allow in the way of development in the city core – now that there is a freeze on all development in the core.
Direct the Director of City Building to proceed with the work identified
Direct the Director of City Building to propose refinements to the Neighbourhood Centre’s Policy to simplify and clarify the intent of the policies, generally described in section 4.2.3; and
Direct the Director of City Building to modify the terms of reference upon confirmation of impacts related to Bill 108 and other Provincial changes to the land use planning and development system, if required.
All this began when city council adopted a new Official Plan. That plan was sent to the Region which is the approval authority for the Official Plan.
On December 4, 2018, the day after the new city council was sworn in, the Region of Halton provided a notice to the City advising that the adopted Official Plan does not conform with the Regional Official Plan in a number of respects. The effect of the notice extends the Region’s review process indefinitely, until such time as the Region determines that the non-conformity is rectified. The supporting information identified that:
The City of Burlington can make additional modifications before the plan is approved by the Region where there is appropriate planning justification and public consultation. Any modifications would need to be assessed for conformity against the Regional Official Plan and Provincial Plans and policy statements.
 The night the election was won. That statement gave the new Mayor a free hand to look at everything in the plan that had been adopted by the previous council despite considerable opposition to the plan from a large portion of the public.
In February, 2019 Council provided a staff direction to re-examine the policies of the adopted Official Plan:
Direct the Director of City Building to immediately commence a process to re- examine the policies of the Official Plan adopted April 26, 2018 in their entirety related to matters of height and intensity and conformity with provincial density targets.
A Council workshop was held on March 18, 2019 to obtain further Council feedback on this direction, which has resulted in the scope of work.
To prepare for the Council Workshop, a series of meetings with Councillors were undertaken. The result of these meetings was a list of issues relevant to each Councillor, which informed the preparation for the Council Workshop.
A number of key themes emerged from the workshop discussion. It was clear that Council agrees that the work identified should be completed by the end of Q1 2020. That is eight months away.
Through discussion at the workshop it was agreed that the adopted Official Plan brings in new policies and forward looking approaches to land use planning and growth. In general, Council supports the majority of the policies within the adopted Official Plan.
Two key areas emerged as requiring further consideration: the Downtown Precinct Plan and the Neighbourhood Centre policies.
 A precinct is not limited to a single given area: it is rather a description of what can be done in an area within the named precinct. It was acknowledged at the workshop that the Official Plan is not intended to provide detailed land use policies for specific sites. As a result there is a role for more detailed land use planning processes. These processes can include both detailed, city-led area specific planning exercises such as area-specific plans, or site-specific development applications for Official Plan and/or Zoning Bylaw Amendments.
Coming up with an Official Plan that could be defended has never been a slam dunk for Burlington. Almost everything they do gets challenged – costing the city a bundle in legal fees and months of work time dealing with the appeals.
To this end, staff and consultants will need to work together to prepare modifications to policies, based on technical information and public and stakeholder input, which demonstrate the functionality and feasibility of a recommended scenario in conformity with the Regional Official Plan and Provincial Plans and policy statements.
It was no surprise to anyone that throughout all the questions and discussions at the workshop was the role community would play – this council was elected to ensure that the community was at the table.
The results had to be reflective of the community’s vision for the future of Burlington;
– Be that residents believe that the Official Plan represents their values for the future of the City;
– Be supported by an effective public engagement process; and
– Be supported by the public.
Staff agree that the work to re-examine the Official Plan must be supported by a public engagement process and a decision-making process that all stakeholders can understand and agree to in principle. As identified generally by Council, this need for public satisfaction of the plan must be married with the desire to develop a plan that is defensible from a land use planning perspective.
In order to achieve success the project team must transparently:
– educate and communicate the givens – the plan must conform to provincial policy.
– identify the questions that are in scope and out of scope;
– collect, analyze and respond to the feedback;
– use the best tools possible to communicate alternatives, short and long-term impacts and their associated benefits and drawbacks;
– describe and continually communicate about decision making processes; and,
– identify process challenges along the way.
It was this need to ensure that the public was informed while the changes were being made and not have a finished plan introduced to an unsuspecting and unaware public that brought out the need for the creation of a communications plan that had input from the public – people sitting at the table with the planners. A major new step for Burlington.
 Bill 108 was not only contentious because of the content but also because of the speed with which is was introduced and made law. Hovering in the background is the impact of Bill 108 which some have described as a Developers Dream Bill. WeloveBurlington provided an excellent over-view of the Bill and its probable impact. Add to this the Provincial Review which is looking at what form the Regional governments will take going forward.
The Strategic Plan, which has up until now been a list of high level values that everyone subscribes to with there being not very much in the way of detail.
Burlington took a different approach – they took the Strategic Plan “vision” and made it the front end of a series of objectives known as V2F – Vision to Focus. There is a detailed list of where in the Strategic Plan this council thinks the focus should be place.
V2F has been labelled “living document”; one that will undergo changes daily if necessary.
 It was another new move on how council was going to proceed and keep the public in the loop. Problem now is for the public to keep up. While all this is going on council has to deal with a number of related high priority initiatives that are identified in the Official Plan and the Strategic Plan such as the Mobility Hub Area Specific Plans and the Housing Strategy.
Tucked in there is the budget this council wants to have in your hands before Christmas.
These Housing and Mobility Hub initiatives have been postponed given Council’s focus on the re-examination of the Official Plan and the Interim Control Bylaw Land Use Study as well as the work addressing areas of non-conformity of the adopted Official Plan with the Regional Official Plan and given the uncertainty related to the Region’s Official Plan Review.
The March Council Workshop identified two key areas of the Adopted Official Plan that must be included in the scoped re-examination of the adopted Official Plan to guide the next year of work:
a modified precinct plan for the Downtown Urban Centre;
and a review of the Neighbourhood Centre’s policy.
In order to get a solid grip on just what the scope of work was Planning department staff had to be fully conversant with what came out of the March Council workshop; the Motions related to the Downtown Urban Centre that were not passed during the adoption process; the non-Official Plan related Council directions identifying issues to be considered through the Downtown Area Specific Plan; the Commercial Strategy Study recommendations related to the Downtown, with specific attention to small scale retail in the downtown; and the details of Interim Control Bylaw Land Use Study.
This is no small matter.
The Downtown Precinct Plan in the adopted Official Plan was based upon a vision at full build out. Council wanted staff to look at a shorter planning horizon which resulted in a modified precinct plan for the Downtown Urban Centre that would have a planning horizon of 2031, in conformity with provincial policy.
The population and employment forecasts contained in the applicable upper- or single-tier official plan, that is approved and in effect as of July 1, 2017, will apply to all planning matters in that municipality, including lower-tier planning matters where applicable.
The background technical work prepared to date for the Downtown area-specific plan, to be finalized through this study, will confirm development constraints and provide clarity on infrastructure capacity and required improvements.
The shift of the scope of this work to the 2031 planning horizon means that there are not likely to be significant infrastructure issues identified through this planning exercise.
The next planning horizon is 2041.
The planners would just like to get what they have in front of them done within the very tight timelines.
The outcome of this work will not constitute an area-specific plan, instead the outcome will be modified policies which will go beyond the high level Official Plan policies that are included in the current adopted Official Plan (April 2018). The modified policies will be developed to ensure that the City can conform with the Growth Plan policy to accommodate 200 people and jobs per hectare combined within the Urban Growth Centre boundary by considering the findings of technical work and public, agency, and stakeholder feedback.
What is going to get a very close review are all precincts within the Downtown Urban Centre where significant concerns regarding height and density were raised by the current Council;
– All precincts impacted by motions not passed when considered by the previous Council in the development and finalization of the adopted Official Plan;
– Specific policies identified to be modified based on the technical work;
– Small scale retail in the Downtown;
– Built form transition to adjacent residential areas;
– Heritage conservation and cultural heritage resources;
– Flexible streets
The Proposed Terms of Reference do not address:
– Shifting the Urban Growth Centre from the downtown to Burlington GO. The Urban Growth Centre location is established in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Region of Halton Official Plan. Any policies proposed for the Official Plan must conform with both;
– Major Transit Station Area and Mobility Hub role and function in the downtown as they will be considered in the Interim Control By-Law Land Use study and recommendations will inform this study;
– Transportation or infrastructure assessments to support people and jobs beyond 2031.
– Undertaking a Neighbourhood Character Area study for the St. Luke’s and Emerald precincts. Matters of zoning in the St. Luke’s and Emerald precincts will be considered at the time of the Zoning By-law Review;
– The Old Lakeshore Road Precinct. This area requires a more detailed area specific planning process as identified by adopted Official Plan policy. For more details see Appendix B;
– The Waterfront Hotel Site. This site is subject to a process outlined by a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the City and landowner. For more details see Appendix B;
– Revisions to the Downtown Public Service Precinct. It is expected that the development criteria and other policies of the adopted Official Plan provide sufficient guidance for development in the precinct; and,
– Developing parking rates for the Downtown. Parking rates for intensification areas such as the Downtown are to be addressed through the preparation of site-specific zoning.
Interest was expressed in having the Neighbourhood Centre policies in the adopted Official Plan reviewed.
The role of policy in supporting the redevelopment of Neighbourhood Centres is to establish a detailed policy framework to guide the consideration of site specific development applications. Consistent with the Strategic Plan, the policy framework encourages redevelopment of plazas.
Staff has considered the discussion at the Council Workshop and acknowledge that there is an opportunity to simplify and provide further clarity related to the intent of the Neighbourhood Commercial policies and their relationship to the Strategic Plan. This will be led by staff and would be implemented as part of the proposed modifications to the adopted Official Plan. This work will include:
– Identifying opportunities to clarify and describe the intent of the policy;
– Simplifying language; and
– Clarifying the relationship of the land use policies with the growth framework.
The scope of work proposed has a one-year time frame which was identified as a critical success factor. As discussed at the Council Workshop held on March 18th, another consequence of proposing work that would extend the time frame beyond March 2020 is primarily to shift out the initiation of work for a number of planning studies or initiatives by 12 – 18 months.
When all this was being worked out Bill 108 was not yet the law of the land. Now it is. The Province has also released a new Growth Plan and Provincially Significant Employment Zones Mapping.
Funding of $600,000 from the Policy initiatives reserve fund was approved as part of the 2019 budget for Official Plan related initiatives.
While all this work is taking place a group has been meeting with citizen groups to determine how all this complex information can be put before the public on an ongoing basis. The Gazette wrote about that work in an article last week.
Related news story:
Engagement with the public on a much different and highly desirable scale is taking place during the summer.
You have lost control
Weloveburlington on Bill 108
 By Pepper Parr
July 28th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
This is a seven part series on transit and how Burlington plans to get to the point where the public will take public transit to get to where they want to go in the city because it is cheaper, faster, more convenient and seen as the smart thing to do.
Part 4.
Customer Experience
Burlington Transit already offers real-time trip information and an acceptable level of comfort, accessibility and shelter. However, more in-depth real-time operational information and proactive communication would give passengers certainty and a sense of reliability. Improved accessibility and increasing the provision of shelters help to remove barriers to transit use, making it an option for more members of the community. Finally, enhanced digital connectivity builds on one of transit’s competitive advantages – the ability to dedicate attention to digital devices to get work done and stay connected while travelling.
Customer experience enhancements can encourage new customers to transit and, importantly, keep existing customers on the system.
Strategy 3A: Improve Communications
Beyond real-time trip information, communications regarding planned and unplanned disruptions is the next most important information that passengers need to improve their comfort in using the service.
Burlington Transit currently publishes their planned disruptions on their website, but there is little integration of this information with trip planning services. An analysis of Burlington Transit’s staffing levels and discussions with key staff members have indicated that there are less on-road operations supervisors than necessary to provide full coverage of all services.
While operational recovery from disruptions is paramount, affected passengers need to be made aware of the problem, its outlook and their alternatives as soon as possible. To ensure that customers are aware of the actual operating environment on the routes and services they need to take, a service standard should be set to publish unplanned disruptions on the Burlington Transit website and provide the information to the open data (Google Transit) API within 15 minutes of them occurring. This will require additional operations staff to address disruptions and better communication with Customer Service.
These initiatives align with Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #2 (Be Forward-Thinking in how services are planned and delivered), particularly Objective 2.1 (Technology) as they work to harness existing and new technologies to deliver a better customer experience.
Recommendations:
• Establish a new service standard to ensure that all disruptions and unplanned events are
published on Burlington Transit’s website, to the open data (Google Transit) disruptions API and social feeds within 15 minutes of them occurring.
• Hire operations administrative dispatch clerks to support on-road operations supervisors and enhance communications with Customer Service.
• Investigate partnerships with third-party trip planning apps to provide riding assistance to new customers.
Strategy 3B: Improve Comfort and Accessibility at the Stop
 Many of the shelters were in very poor condition – that has begun to change. Piping in music would be nice. To continue to progress towards a more accessible system, Burlington Transit is finalizing a 2019 Accessibility Plan, which forms part of the City of Burlington’s Multi-Year Accessibility Plan 2019-2024. The Accessibility Plan outlines actions to remove barriers and improve accessibility. Many items in this business plan echo initiatives in the accessibility plan, including improved frequency, improved communications and improved links with neighbouring municipalities. The plan also includes a bus stop upgrade program and the additional of real-time information screens at the Burlington GO Station and the Downtown Terminal. In addition, Burlington Transit has recently formalized new bus stop design standards (see Strategy 3C), which define dimensions, access, orientation and other requirements for accessible transit stops and shelters.
Recommendations:
• Continue to implement key actions in the 2019-2020 Accessibility Plan.
• Develop updates to the Accessibility Plan for each year subsequent year during the business plan period.
• Expand the bus stop upgrade program to include accessible shelters (see Strategy 3C).
Strategy 3C: Shelters
A customer’s perception of the transit experience starts before they board a vehicle. One of the first interactions with the system on the day of travel is waiting for the service at a stop. Shelters provide customers with a place to take refuge during inclement weather (rain, snow and strong winds) or shade during hot summer days. They also provide a source of information about the service and a sense of permanency of a transit system, particularly on routes that provide direct, frequent and rapid service.
 Larger, brighter and cleaner transit shelters. Report suggests Transit work with Parks and Recreation on placement – that would be breaking down a silo. As Burlington Transit continues to expand its service and build on the grid-network, the expansion of shelters should be considered as a key part of improving the customer experience prior to boarding the bus. This could involve a number of key actions:
1. Improve Existing Shelters
2. Develop Shelter Placement Criteria
3. Work with the Burlington Parks and Recreation Department to Increase Natural Shelters at Stops
Shelter improvements work towards Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #1 (Be Customer-Focused in every aspect of how service is delivered), particularly Objective 1.6 (Accessibility) as can improve the customer experience and accessibility at the qualifying stops.
Recommendations:
• Continue to conduct bus shelter condition assessments for all existing stops with shelters.
• Create a shelter policy, dictating how stops qualify for shelters and how to prioritize the roll-out of new shelters.
• Work with Burlington Parks and Recreation Department to increase natural shelters at stops.
Strategy 3D: Digital Connectivity
One of the benefits to taking transit is that riders are free to engage in activities that are not possible when driving. Staying connected is increasingly important and it is common to see transit passengers using smartphones and tablets during their journeys. To improve the experience of customers using electronic devices during their travels, Burlington Transit could consider providing charging facilities and wifi. This allows customers to use their time more productively while on longer transit routes, access social media and music streaming services and use their mobile devices to access trip planning tools and be informed in real-time of disruptions in the system.
 WiFi on buses can be done quite easily. Do it soon. In the shorter term, implementing USB power outlets on buses and wifi at facilities are relatively simple and effective ways to encourage passenger connectivity when using transit. The implementation of these amenities should be on a pilot basis and focused on routes and facilities with higher ridership, to maximize their usefulness and the amount of feedback received.
Connectivity improvements align with Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #2 (Be Forward-Thinking in how services are planned and delivered), particularly Objective 2.1 (Technology) as they work to harness existing and new technologies to deliver a better customer experience.
Recommendation:
• Include USB charging points on all new bus deliveries. Charging ports should be located strategically throughout buses, which could be assigned to a single longer-distance route or used throughout the network. Customer feedback and uptake by route and time of day should be collected to optimize the number and location of charging points on future deliveries.
• Implement a wifi pilot at major stations and transfer points (excluding GO Transit stations).
It has been a long long time since the words “customer experience” were uttered in Burlington when talking about transit.
The background report on what could and should be included in the five year plan is sound. Now to get a city council that will take the plunge – do it early in the term and let the public get used to what is coming their way.
Part 1: Transits five year plan has what some might call an over abundance-of wishful thinking
Part 2: Strategies and recommendations to create the needed structure and delivery model.
Part 3: Making all the parts fit.
By Pepper Parr
July 25th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
This is a seven part series on transit and how Burlington plans to get to the point where the public will take public transit to get to where they want to go in the city because it is cheaper, faster, more convenient and seen as the smart thing to do.
Part 2:
In setting out the plans for creating a more effective transit plan a number of growth strategies were made the focus for staff over the next five years.
These reflect the Burlington Transit the vision, mission and strategic directions noted in the policy framework and will be supported by an updated organizational structure and an implementation and financial plan. These growth strategies are organized into the following themes:
1. Service Structure and Delivery
The Strategies and recommendations to make this happen are set out below.
2. Mobility Management
3. Customer Experience
4. Travel Demand Management
1. Streamline Service Structure and Delivery
The way services are structured and delivered defines the primary customer aspects of any transit system. Where services go, how often vehicles are scheduled, how long the trip takes, how accessible are stops, and how the service is delivered (focus on customer service) are all key factors in residents choosing not only which services to take, but if transit is an option for them at all.
There are a number of strategic directions that will be implemented over the next five years to move towards this ridership growth target. These are described in more detail below:
Strategy 1A: Move to a More Direct Grid-Based System
Burlington Transit has already recognized the benefits that grid-based systems can bring and is making its first steps towards this goal in its September 2019 service change. In order for the grid network to be successful, there must be continued emphasis on:
• Intensification of land use along the arterial roadway network;
• Connectivity to the arterial grid to expand the market within a five-minute walk of the network;
• Improvements to the pedestrian environment at and connected to bus stops; and
• Investments in service levels to limit waiting times for customers that must now transfer between two arterial routes.
 The current route system is not working – it was designed for a different time.  A grid route system will mean a significant realignment of vehicles and something people will have to get used to – but it will solve a lot of the current problems. The Burlington Transit network was developed largely on a grid arterial system, focused on key population and employment areas, with links to the GO Rail network.
Key north-south corridors like Brant and Walkers link the established southern areas to growing northern areas.
Such grid systems allow for more direct routes on arterial roads that are faster, resulting in quicker journeys that attract more riders. While there is a role for local services, the focus of Burlington Transit’s future investment should be on services where they can generate the greatest ridership per invested service hour.
This service realignment works towards Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #3 (Be Business-Minded and aligned with municipal directions), particularly Objective 3.1 (Effectiveness), in ensuring that services operated are as effective as possible. Where gaps are left in the network, alternative service delivery options (Strategy 1A) should be explored as a more cost-effective solution to fill them in.
Recommendations:
• Delete circuitous peak-only and after-hours only routes.
• Consider the deletion of circuitous local routes. The removal of these routes should only be considered in concert with the exploration of alternative service delivery options (Strategy 1A).
• Strengthen key arterial corridors and connections to GO Transit stations. Focus on east-west connectivity, with strategic north-south corridors.
Strategy 1B: Increase Service Levels to Support Higher Ridership Growth
Implementing high-frequency service on Burlington’s arterial network may be a challenge given the limited pedestrian connectivity. A number of arterial roads are characterized by rear-lot residential, or long blocks with limited pedestrian connections into interior neighbourhoods.
This makes providing a frequent service on all of the grid-routes a challenge. Since frequency improvements are necessary to facilitate transfers between north-south and east-west routes, Burlington Transit should work with the City’s Planning and Development Department to improve pedestrian connectivity (including road crossings) between arterial transit routes and local neighbourhoods and identify opportunities for mixed-use intensification.
This increase in service levels aligns with Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #3 (Be Business-Minded and aligned with municipal directions), particularly Objective 3.1 (Investment), in acknowledging that investment in mobility can improve broader quality of life, achieve economic development and produce environmental benefits.
Recommendations:
• Continue to improve frequencies on Burlington’s arterial grid roads, particularly on the east- west corridors of Plains / Fairview and New, as well as the north-south corridor along Brant.
These corridors are planned to see the most mixed-use, commercial and high density development in Burlington’s Official Plan (2018).
• Work with the City of Burlington Planning and Development Department to increase and enhance pedestrian connectivity between arterial transit routes and local neighbourhoods and identify opportunities for mixed-use intensification along arterial routes.
Strategy 1C: Introduce Transit Priority Features to Improve System Reliability
Transit signal priority works by prioritizing the flow of transit vehicles at controlled intersections. Transponders are fitted to vehicles, which notify traffic light systems of their presence, and request that a green light be extended when transit vehicles are delayed (passive transit signal priority) or that a dedicated signal phase is dedicated to an approaching transit vehicle (active transit signal priority).
Queue jump lanes are transit-only lanes on the approach to, and immediately after, intersections. These lanes allow transit vehicles to ‘jump the queue’ at intersections when they are paired with an active transit signal priority features.
 Queue jump lane – it’s a unique idea – and will certainly improve the flow of traffic for buses – drivers in cars will not like it – but we are moving to an occasion when cars ‘share’ the road. Queue jump lanes and signal priority would be appropriate treatments for important transit arterial routes that see less delays and travel time variability, or operate less frequently. Such corridors include Guelph Line north of the QEW or Appleby Line.
Burlington Transit has already undertaken investigations to pilot transit signal priority on the Plains / Fairview corridor. It is intended that this corridor will act as a pilot for the future implementation of such a system across the broader network. This pilot will be implemented in the first year of the business plan and it is expected that an expansion of transit priority measures will occur within the five year life of the plan.
In addition to potential transit priority measures for Burlington Transit services, Metrolinx’s 2041 Regional Transportation Plan includes transit priority along Dundas Street to central Burlington and Frequent Regional Bus services using HOV lanes on Highway 407.
While these measures are focused on regional trips, the Dundas Street priority will also provide direct benefits to Burlington Transit.
This increase in service levels aligns with Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #1 (Be Customer- Focused in every aspect of how service is delivered), particularly Objective 1.1 (Service Excellence) and Objective 1.3 (Travel Time) by exploring transit priority measures to achieve faster and more reliable journeys. It also aligns with Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #2 (Be Forward-Thinking about how Services are Planned and Delivered), particularly Objective 2.1. (Technology) by exploring new technology to improve reliability and travel time.
Recommendations:
• Implement currently-planned pilot transit priority project on Plains / Fairview corridor.
• Conduct a study of transit priority needs in both the short and long term in Burlington. The study should include a prioritization of potential projects following the pilot.
• Initiate discussions with Metrolinx and advocate for the implementation of transit priority on Dundas Street and Brant Street as part of the overall Dundas BRT project. Ensure that their plans align with Burlington Transit’s needs and complement other transit priority projects.
Strategy 1D: Improve Connections to the GO Transit Network
Services from these stations connect Burlington to Toronto as often as every 5-10 minutes during peak periods and every 30 minutes during non-peak times. Limited peak service is also provided to Hamilton. Almost all of Burlington Transit’s routes currently connect to at least one GO Station, providing a logical transfer point between Burlington Transit routes and links to destinations outside of Burlington. Between 3 – 12 percent of GO Rail passengers in Burlington use Burlington Transit to connect to GO Rail services at each of its stations. This suggests that there is room to grow this market to reach Burlington Transit’s ridership growth targets.
By 2025, Metrolinx plans to improve all-day frequencies on the Lakeshore West Line between Aldershot GO Station and Union Station to every 15 minutes, as part of the “Regional Express Rail” initiative. This will also see travel times between Burlington GO and Union Station reduced by up to 19 minutes, as well as 2 minute savings between Burlington GO and Appleby GO. Regional Express Rail will increase the attractiveness of the service for trips to Union Station as well as other mid-line stations along the Lakeshore West line.
This partnership works towards Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #3 (Be Business-Minded and aligned with municipal directions), particularly Objective 3.2 (Partnerships) as it seeks to achieve better and more cost effective options for passengers by working with other transit providers.
Recommendations:
• Improve frequency of direct connections to GO Rail stations with the introduction of RER.
• Explore on-demand alternative service delivery strategies to connect to all GO Train trips that do not conveniently connect to a fixed-route Burlington Transit bus.
• Explore integration opportunities to better utilize the RER network for local express trips within the City. This should include improvements to trip planning tools, marketing and communications and well as service integration.
• Investigate the implementation of a fully-integrated single fare with GO Transit. This would require local trips to be priced on the basis of distance.
Strategy 1E: Increase Service Integration with Neighbouring Transit Systems
There is also a significant travel demand between Burlington and Hamilton and Burlington and Oakville that should be addressed as a key strategy to grow ridership. This can be done through improved coordination and service integration that will reduce duplication of service and create a more seamless experience for the customer.
Burlington Transit already offers a level of fare integration with its neighbouring systems. Transfers from Hamilton Street Railway and Oakville Transit are accepted on some services, both in paper form or automatically calculated by Presto. As part of increased utilization of and integration with GO Train services, there exists the opportunity to further reduce fare friction in the region, by adopting a single fare system across multiple systems.
There is an opportunity to strengthen and add to these links with Hamilton and Oakville through service integration. Such a shared service model could provide Burlington with cost savings for the provision of services at its borders and improve seamless passenger connections.
This initiative aligns with Burlington Transit’s Strategic Direction #3 (Be Business-Minded and aligned with municipal directions), particularly Objective 3.2 (Partnerships) as it seeks to achieve better and more cost effective options for passengers through working with other transit providers.
Recommendations:
• Meet with HSR and Oakville Transit to identify opportunities to further integrate services through sharing and coordinated timetabling and routing.
• Investigate the implementation of a fully-integrated single fare with neighbouring systems and GO Transit (see Strategy 2D). This would require local trips to be priced on the basis of distance.
There is some very solid thinking set out in this part of the background on the Burlington Transit five year plan.. Burlington has not seen this level of professionalism applied to transit before nor has the phrase “Be Customer- Focused in every aspect” been part of the language used as a guiding principle for transit in Burlington.
That phrase alone justifies the years of advocacy on the part of Bfast for better transit service
Part 1: Transits five year plan has what some might call an over abundance-of wishful thinking
By Pepper Parr
July 19th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Human Resources is responsible for attracting and retaining City employees; staff/labour relations; employee benefits; health and safety; pay research and staff training and development.
This just might hurt a little – it is about what Director of Human Resources Laura Boyd called Enterprise risk – labour market, in a report to Council. We are not paying staff the going rate, a lot of people are quitting and some critical people are retiring. It got a Receive and File Recommendation from Council.
 Director of Human Resources Laura Boyd Boyd points out that with the focus on “the implementation of many strategic initiatives by the Burlington Leadership Team (BLT) through the development of performance measures and completion by dates, thought has to be given to the successful execution of the plan with its goals, resources, and budgets, and we also must consider the staff team who will execute the strategy.”
Management consultant Peter Drucker put the challenge that faces every organization very well when he said: “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.”
What this means is that while targets and performance measurements have been identified, it is workplace culture and focused leadership that will drive the execution of strategy. Culture will either strengthen or undermine our ability to attract and retain quality employees to execute this strategy.
Burlington is now on its fourth City Manager in as many years. The city now has a decidedly different city council that doesn’t subscribe to the approach taken by the Goldring councils.
The retention of employees and what we pay the employees working at city hall is an issue that needs attention.
The purpose of the report Boyd put before council was to review ”those attributes which make up a healthy workplace culture; identify risks to our own culture; and map out the steps required to move forward.”
The corporate culture is an issue. In her report Boyd described culture as:
• The critical organizational element that will attract talent, drive engagement, impact satisfaction and affect performance
• The personality of the business;
• The City’s employment brand;
• The sum of its values, traditions, beliefs, interactions, behaviour and attitudes;
“Simply put – culture is the difference between having a performance driven, highly engaged organization which executes ongoing strategy and an organization where goals are set, targets are generally met, and staff are performing satisfactorily overall.”
Is Burlington meeting the standard? Not if the number of people who have quit is any indicator.
The following seven attributes define those areas that influence a workplace culture.
 The seven attributes define those areas that influence a workplace culture. The following data was provided to Council to assess current workforce strengths and risks with regards to the ability to deliver Council’s priorities.
In 2016 the City conducted its first Culture Survey. While the results are now three years old, the following were the high and low scores at that moment in time:
High scores:
• Planning the work is ongoing and involves everyone in the process to some degree;
• There is an ethical code of conduct that guides our behaviour and tells us right from wrong;
• Teamwork is used to get work done, rather than relying on orders from management
• There is continuous investment in the skills of employees
• Public input directly influences our decisions.
Low scores:
• Leadership has clearly communicated objectives we are trying to accomplish;
• There is a clear and consistent management style, so employees know what to expect;
• There is a clear and consistent culture;
• We continuously track our progress against our stated goals;
• Our people are viewed as an important source of our competitive advantage.
“When the results were further analyzed, it became apparent that communication within the organization diminishes between hierarchical levels.
Specifically, between the Burlington Leadership Team and the Supervisors/Manager level and then between the Supervisors/Managers level and their direct reports.”
If that is Burlington’s situation – no wonder there is trouble in paradise.
In response to the 2016 survey four employee teams were set up to identify and execute projects/programs to improve our results. Specifically, the teams organized themselves around the following themes and have been developing and implementing programs to address our survey results and improve our culture:
• Innovation
• Staff Investment
• Organization Values
• Communication
“Turnover is a simple retention measure.” Would that it were so and that simple.
Boyd’s report said: Over the past decade voluntary turnover at city hall has remained consistent between 4.2% to 5.7%. Voluntary turnover includes those staff who have quit or retired to date.
From the results below, Boyd reports that “we are trending to a much higher voluntary turnover in 2019 – closer to 10%.
Boyd makes the critical point: “It is important to know why we are experiencing higher turnover. When voluntary turnover for the past two and a half years was reviewed, compensation came out clearly as the most significant factor.”
Number of quits mentioning compensation as a reason for leaving % of total employee quits
Examples of other reasons provided for employees leaving varied and include promotions, job closer to home, position not the right fit and supervision to name a few.
Burlington has found that there are position difficult to fill.
A review was completed of the positions which were advertised externally in the marketplace from the perspective of how difficult it was to fill these roles.
Difficult to fill positions can occur for several reasons including compensation, not attracting qualified candidates, and being turned down by first candidates and having to offer to second or third choices.
As an example Boyd pointed to the Legal Department, the position of Solicitor was advertised, our offer was turned down, even after considerable negotiation, and we have now employed an outside agency to assist in sourcing appropriate candidates.
A forecasting report has been obtained from OMERS to assist the city in identifying who can retire with an unreduced pension up to 2023. Currently there are 185 employees who can retire with an unreduced pension by 2023. This represents 20% of the city’s full-time workforce.
Of the 185 people who can retire, 36% are people leaders while 64% are individual contributors.
This comes close to gutting the leadership level which some people feel is the best thing that can happen to the city.
Following is a yearly breakdown of the retirement outlook:
“A non-union compensation analysis was conducted by Mercer – the results were made Confidential.
Most private companies align themselves with a market position of the 50th percentile – however in the highly competitive GTA, public sector employers align with the 60th to 75th percentile to compete for employee resources.
“The City’s current Council approved market position is the 65th percentile however our recently surveyed actual job rates are now aligned with the 50th percentile.
“To realign with the 65th percentile, job rates will have to be increased by approximately 3% to 8%.”
By rates Boyd mean salary rates and while the percentage may seem small it will have a huge impact on the budget. And that 8% will drift up to 10% – maybe more.
“Our market competitiveness varies across the salary grades and this is likely an indication of challenges with our job evaluation system, which was developed in the 1980’s, not being reflective of current workplace requirements and expectations.
There are processes and programs in the works. Boyd reports that the ‘Following are examples of projects and initiatives that are either in process or that have been implemented which positively impact our culture:
Corporate Culture Area Examples of Completed and In-Progress Culture Activities
Leadership • Mohawk Future Ready Leadership Program.
• DeGroote Leadership Development Program
• Launch of Succession Management Program
• Review of the role and the function of BLT
• Introduction of Leadership Competencies
Management • Introduction of Mobile Workforce guidelines
• Discontinuation of performance appraisal form and the introduction of Coaching and People Leader Training for the setting and management of performance expectations
Workplace Practices • Introduction of BRAVOS Awards
• Realignment of Performance Excellence Program and Service Awards
• Development and launch of Organization Values.
• Restating the Dress Code policy to the more flexible “Dress for Your Day” guidelines.
• Staff BBQ and holiday gathering
 There was a time when staff at city hall had some fun. This photograph is the crew from the Clerk’s department taking part in a United Way fundraising effort. Communication
• The development and communication of Council’s four-year work plan identifying action, projects and initiatives with measurements.
The report concludes with the following:
“The City of Burlington has been and will continue to be a great employer however, we are exposed to considerable human resource risks.”
It is self-serving statements like the above that frighten people. The truth is there are some very serious issues that need immediate attention. Boyd is correct when she says:
“To deliver council’s work plan and to build upon our employment brand, we need to put a conscious effort into strengthening our workplace culture. We are experiencing workforce pressures not previously felt, pressures which will require targeted action to be able to retain engaged and skilled staff and to compete in the marketplace for qualified staff.
“We need to deliver on Council’s priorities through strategic focus and execution. Our Enterprise Risk Registry has identified our workforce as the number one risk facing this organization and the data outlined above supports this position on the registry.
“We are now starting to feel significant attraction and retention pressures which will impact our culture and therefore our ability and internal capacity to deliver the work plan. To address these pressures the following next steps have been identified:
 City manager Tim Commisso has his hands full keeping council out of the reserve fund cookie jar; developing a culture that is real and will hold “Priorities and accountability for delivery of Council’s work plan have been clearly identified and assigned to members of BLT. A review of the corporate structure, one which will assist the City Manager to strategically transition the organization into a more flexible twenty-first century organization, will occur over the next few months.
“In addition, the City Manager, in keeping with the direction approved by Council during the 2019 budget, is completing the realignment of the City Manager’s Office to address the overall strategic management capability of the organization. The goal of this review is to ensure our structure is aligned to retain highly skilled staff and to attract new talent entering the workforce. In support of this goal, a review of the role of the Burlington Leadership Team is also underway.”
 A BBQ for staff – the sale of the burgers was part of a United Way fundraising effort. A second culture survey will be done in the Fall of 2019. A comparison of 2016 to 2019 results will assist us in determining where there are further gaps so that we can target additional efforts in those areas.
There is to be a Diversity and Inclusivity strategy and implementation plan for execution over Council’s term.
“Expanding the recruitment channels, ensuring the culture within the workplace is open, welcoming to all and is reflective of our community will strengthen the City as an employer now and well into the future.”
The problems with hiring is that the municipal world has a culture and a set of conditions that are hugely different from the private sector. Municipalities end up stealing each other’s staff.
Boyd adds that “ this report has provided some information about the city’s current competitiveness to the marketplace, a follow-up report with detailed compensation system recommendations and potential cost impacts will be brought to Council in the early fall. The following items will need to be considered and approved by council in this follow-up report:
• The City’s competitive market position;
• Appropriate municipal comparators; and
• Development and implementation of a new job evaluation system.
In the meantime, the leadership team will be considering where temporary market premiums are required to retain highly skilled or at-risk employees and implementing these premiums as appropriate.
Boyd concludes that: “It is important to appropriately align the City’s resources, both budgets and staff, to ensure the successful execution of Council’s work plan. This report outlines the human resource and workforce pressures we are currently experiencing which puts at risk our ability to successfully implement Council’s work plan.
Put colloquially – Burlington isn’t able to put a solid team on the field – and we are all paying the price for past in-actions.
 By Pepper Parr
July 18th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Put the best spin possible on the situation and bull on through it is about all you can do.
Six months into her term of office and the Mayor loses one of her staff or as the Mayor put it in her announcement:
“There’s been some recent changes in the Mayor’s Office — I’m looking for an Executive Administrator to help fill an opening on my team of three staffers.
“My former assistant Annemarie Cumber has taken an opportunity for career advancement and a secondment to assist with large corporate projects, such as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Enterprise Asset Management Solution (EAMS), at the City of Burlington. We wish her the best of luck and success in her new role.
“I have asked my former assistant from my time as a councillor, Georgie Gartside, to help us out in the Mayor’s Office during this transition phase. We are very grateful for her assistance — she is a true asset and great addition to the Mayor’s team. I also want to thank the Councillors’ Assistants team who are working together to provide coverage in the councillors’ offices during this time.
In addition, we’re very grateful for the time and dedication high school co-op student Kaitlyn Fitzpatrick has been lending us this month. Kaitlyn is assisting my office until Aug. 2 and has been doing very well in the time she’s spent with us already. I thank my office staff and City of Burlington staff for making her feel welcome and a part of our team.
 The Office of the Mayor – she got to choose the colours. “The Mayors Office Executive Administrator position is posted online on the City of Burlington’s website and is a contract position from September 2019-November 2022 — the posting closing date is July 30, 2019. Please click the links for more details.
“Reporting directly to the Mayor’s Chief of Staff the Mayor’s Executive Administrator will provide administrative, communications, logistics and constituent relations support to the Office of the Mayor. By managing the Mayor’s schedule, overseeing incoming communications and requests, providing event support, and liaising with constituents, internal staff and external partners, this role is essential in contributing to the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the Office of the Mayor.
“We’re looking for someone who thrives in challenging environments and can juggle many balls at the same time. You are comfortable interacting with people and don’t mind being out in the public eye. You are empathetic, diplomatic, a great problem-solver and can work independently and confidently, while making sound judgement calls on a host of matters.”
There has been an interesting upgrade to the titles that are used in the office of the Mayor. The last time we talked to Victoria Al-Samadi she was Mayor’s Chief of Communications & Strategic Advisor; now she is referred to as the Chief of Staff .
Also, what’s with the secondment? Our understanding of the term is; “The term secondment describes where an employee or a group of employees is assigned on a temporary basis to work for another, ‘host’ organization, or a different part of their employer’s organization. On expiry of the secondment term, the employee (the ‘secondee’) will ‘return’ to their original employer.”
The job opening is posted on the city’s web site
By Pepper Parr
July 16th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
 The dream, at least a part of it, came true for HalTech and Tech Place, when RBC announced the acquisition of WayPay, a cloud-based payments fintech from Burlington, Ontario that offers business clients a best-in-class solution for accounts payable automation and payment optimization.
By seamlessly connecting to leading accounting platforms, WayPay specializes in helping companies reduce their payables pain points by improving the reconciliation and approvals process, creating significant time and cost savings.
In a statement RBC said: “This acquisition enables us to expand our portfolio of digitally-enabled capabilities and advice for our business clients and further strengthens RBC’s position as a digital leader in the market,” says Greg Grice, Executive Vice-President of Business Financial Services at RBC.
“By integrating WayPay’s innovative payment solution, we’re able to provide clients with a secure, simple and automated payables and payments solution as part of RBC’s comprehensive suite of business offerings to help them manage and grow their business with greater ease and efficiency.”
 “Many businesses are already planning the transition from paper cheques as manual reconciliation is a time-sensitive process prone to errors. The acquisition of WayPay will add new capabilities for RBC to bring all payment types together onto one platform, providing clients with a more comprehensive view of their accounts while facilitating the shift from manual, paper-based processes to digital payments.
“WayPay was built to allow businesses to automate their payables process regardless of their accounting software and how many, what type, or where in the world they wish to send a payment. We are helping businesses spend less time approving and reconciling their payables and providing greater visibility so they can focus on building and growing their business,” says Robert Bast, Co-Founder at WayPay. “We are thrilled to join the RBC team where we see incredible synergies which will create even more value and ensure many more business owners benefit from the power of automated reconciliation and digital payments.”
 Anita Cassidy, Acting Executive Director at Burlington Economic Development Corporation (BEDC) is thrilled with the announcement. “Since its launch in 2014, WayPay has been an innovation ecosystem leader in Burlington,” she said. “Our team has had the opportunity to get to know the leadership team at WayPay and witness firsthand their dedication and enthusiasm for what they do. We are incredibly excited for them because being acquired by a larger company is an incredible achievement for a start-up. WayPay was founded with the goal to scale, and so being acquired by RBC demonstrates the value in their technology.”
WayPay will continue to be an agnostic solution which means users can benefit even if they wish to use products from other financial institutions on the platform. Learn more at www.waypay.ca.
Burlington’s approach to economic development has been, in part, to focus on the small, start up tech sector which was the rationale for the creation of Tech Place located on the North Service Road and dedicated to the start up tech community.
That approach is being reviewed by the city. Mayor Marianne Meed Ward heard Rob Burton Mayor of Oakville tell an audience that Oakville lost interest in shelling out tonnes of cash but not having the deciding vote on the direction taken by the economic development people.
That didn’t hurt the interest the Mayor has in bringing that work in house – after a thorough review is done.
What added to the discomfort within city hall was the news that Tech Place is a high rent rate over the six year period they are in the space. They got a year of free rent to get them into the space they occupy on the North Service Road.
Expect to see some changes in the way economic development is handled in the city once everyone is back from summer vacation.
July 13th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Globe and Mail editorial has a viewpoint on both the character and built form of a community that sheds some light on what Burlington faces. Several words have been set in bold by the Gazette.
 The defining feature of North American cities is the single-family detached home. It is the least efficient way to house people, yet municipal zoning laws have historically served to ensure its primacy.
It’s time for change – and urgently so. The cost of housing in Vancouver and Toronto is stratospheric, and even in more affordable cities like Calgary, Ottawa and Montreal, it is way more expensive than a generation ago.
Expensive housing hinders economic growth. Cities are the engines of the economy but are increasingly inaccessible, and the financial challenge of moving to Canada’s biggest cities, to study or to pursue a career, is daunting.
The high cost of housing also leaves a generation of young Canadians facing the prospect of a lifetime of renting, never able to build equity, or shouldering a worrisome amount of mortgage debt that will take decades to pay off.
There are many factors at play – British Columbia has done much to address the issue of foreign speculators – but the core problem is the allocation of land. Our zoning is forcing cities to expand endlessly outward, by preventing them from building up.
 Alton Village The bulk of municipal land zoned for housing – at least two-thirds of it in many cities – is reserved for detached homes, while multiunit housing is restricted to small designated areas, generally in the city core but often far beyond or on abandoned industrial lands. That leaves the supply of housing artificially limited, particularly in areas near transit lines and city centres.
Meanwhile, owners of detached homes, who have the ear of elected officials, argue the so-called character of their neighbourhoods must not be disturbed. The long-standing status quo serves them well, effectively enriching them through government policy.
But the argument about character is a smokescreen. Where there is a neighbourhood of single-family homes, there was once a forest or a field. No one mourns the lost character of what had been there before. Character is wielded as a weapon against change. As Globe and Mail architecture critic Alex Bozikovic put it in June, “’Character’ means exclusion.”
There is an answer. It’s called the missing middle: small-scale, multiunit housing, from duplexes and triplexes to mid-rise apartment buildings. The missing middle is not a fix-all, but it is an essential step forward.
Minneapolis is a beacon of possible change. Last December, city council passed a plan that ended the dominion of single-family zoning. It is regarded as the first of its kind in the United States, but it’s hardly radical. Where a single house was previously permitted, a building with three units, a triplex, is now allowed. The rallying cry has been “Neighbors for More Neighbors.”
Oregon was the next to move. State legislators in late June passed a bill that will remake single-family zoning to allow fourplexes in cities of more than 25,000 people, and throughout the Portland region.
In Canada, the prospect of change is depressingly dim. In the City of Vancouver, a one-year trial allows applications for duplexes in single-detached zones. This is in a region where the typical house costs $1.4-million and median annual household income is $73,000. Meanwhile, city council is ponderously debating whether to get work started on a new citywide plan that will take three years to complete.
This is the opposite of urgency.
In Toronto, the story isn’t much better. The province in June approved new rules for downtown and midtown Toronto, after reworking plans the city had submitted, but the geographic reach of change is limited. There is no serious talk of rezoning what’s dubbed the “yellow belt” – the 70 per cent of available land limited to single-family homes.
The moves in Minneapolis and Oregon are interesting, but modest compared with what is needed in Vancouver and Toronto. Small apartment buildings – of three, four or five storeys – would go a long way. Then there are important questions about low-income housing and rental housing. And there’s the issue of how cities should benefit from increases in land values sparked by zoning changes.
But first we need some political will. There are 10 million Canadians between the ages of 20 to 40, the time of life when people make a first foray into home ownership. Canada’s zoning rules are antiquated. They should be rewritten to serve the present, not the past.
By Pepper Parr
July 9th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
It is not bed time reading but if you find at some point that you don’t like what your city is doing – flip back to this Vision to Focus (V2F) work plan to learn when they said they were going to align the work they do with the Strategic Plan and determine if they are on target.
In a preamble to the document Mayor Meed Ward said:
There are many new faces around the table at City Council and I’m excited and proud of what we are committing to accomplish for the people of Burlington over the coming four years.
The chart below sets out what this city council wants to get done before the end of its term. The Srategic Plan had four pillars – Staff added a fifth.
 The five areas of the Strategic Plan city council wants the bureaucrats to focus on during the balance of their term of office October 2022 The City’s long-term 25-year strategic plan reflects many of the priorities we identified in our respective campaign platforms said the Mayor. The plan will continue to evolve as our city changes, and our new council responds with new ideas. We are also committed to taking action in our four-year term to begin to implement the plan, where it aligns with our collective vision for Burlington.
That is why we have created a four-year work plan: to focus on what actions we can take in this term of council to deliver on the commitments we made during our respective election campaigns, many of which are captured in the strategic plan. The good news is that there is already a high degree of alignment among our individual campaign platforms, and with the elements in the 25-year Strategic Plan.
The citizens of our community voted for change in the last election. They told us on the campaign trail, and through their votes, that they wanted to see limits to over-development and intensification, better traffic management, protection of our green spaces, and more respect and civility at City Hall.
In the short time we’ve been privileged to serve you, we have implemented an Interim Control Bylaw to pause development in our downtown core and around the Burlington Go Station to better evaluate the long-term vision we have for growth in this area and ensure it represents the wants and needs of our community. We launched the Roseland Private Tree Bylaw to help protect and preserve the tree canopy in one of the oldest parts of our city. We passed motions at City Council to make it clear to the Provincial Government that we would not support development in our greenbelt, and that we are opposed to amalgamation with neighbouring municipalities. We debated the hot topic of allowing retail cannabis stores to operate in our city and voted how our constituents asked us to, with respectful debate as we reached a final decision together.
We launched the Red Tape Red Carpet Task Force to bring together business owners across all industries to identify obstacles to relocation and growth here in Burlington, and work together to remove them.
We worked together to pass a new budget that provided the lowest tax increase for our residents in 8 years while still adding new services that add value to our city.
Most importantly, we have prioritized connecting with our constituents and making sure everyone feels that their voice matters. We attend community fundraisers, local sporting events, flag raising and proclamations, new business openings and school tours, and meet 1 on 1 with constituents every day to help engage people from every corner of our city.
Our vision for the next four years is to continue on this very path. We will focus on key priorities like the environment and climate change, transit, and the health and well-being of our residents and businesses. We’ll deliver the customer service levels you deserve and ensure every voice in our community is heard and valued. We’ll do it all while operating with integrity, transparency and respect in everything we do.
This 2018-2022 Burlington’s Plan: From Vision to Focus document is the corporate work plan for the term of Council to align with the long-term vision of the 25-year Strategic Plan.
Burlington’s corporate alignment and accountability is built on Service Management and Results- Based Accountability Frameworks. A Results-Based Accountability Framework takes into consideration two types of accountability.
The following are the services the city currently delivers.
 These are the services the city currently delivers. Not every city delivers the same in the way of services; leaf collection is an example. Now – just what is it they are going to do?
The Priorities and the Action that needs to be taken to achieve these priorities are set out below
The actions that will be taken to achieve this priority.
Priorities for Focus Area 1
Actions for Focus Area 1
Priorities for Focus Area 2
Actions for Focus area 2
Priorities for Focus Area 3
Actions for Focus area 3.
Priorities for Focus Area 4
Actions for Focus area 4
Priorities for Area 5
Actions for Focus Area 5
The intention is to report to the public in June on each of the targets: were they reached and is it working.
The Road Map to getting all this done in time to decide if you want to re-elect this city council that looks like this.
 This is a massive document that council spent hours going over in great detail and revising to be certain they got it right. It was referred to as a “living document”; one that would change with the stresses, needs and desires of the community. Staff will report to the city at least once a year where they are on the Actions side – they are determined to deliver on the bigger picture plan.
We will report later in the week on the debate and discussion that took place – it was interesting and refreshing to watch this council pull together as a group towards a common goal.
By Staff
June 8th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Mayor Meed Ward issued a statement earlier today pointing to factual inaccuracies in published by Burlington’s MPP Jane McKenna and published in the Burlington Post and, in a slightly different version on the We Love Burlington Facebook page.
In her statement the Mayor said:
 She was Mayor elect in this photograph but clearly quite prepared to step into the ring and battle it out. Democracy is the foundation of our country, and accurate information is a key pillar of it.
It’s therefore essential that our residents and local elected representatives have the facts when commenting on community matters and advocating to Queen’s Park on our behalf.
To that end, I’m writing to correct factual inaccuracies in an advertorial by Burlington Member of Parliament Jane McKenna, titled “Setting the Record Straight on Bill 108,” published in the Burlington Post newspaper on June 20 — and a slightly different version of the article posted on the local group WeLoveBurlington Facebook page (June 17) and to the MPP’s website (June 19).
I have also requested a meeting with MPP McKenna and Oakville North-Burlington MPP Effie Triantafilopoulos to ensure they both have accurate information, to best represent our interests at Queen’s Park as our elected representatives.
Here are the facts:
Bill 108 makes changes to 13 pieces of legislation. It was introduced in May and received Royal Assent in June — and much of the concerns raised by mayors and their residents across the province were ignored. The Region of Halton and the City of Burlington both passed resolutions detailing the problems with Bill 108 in advance of passage. You can read those here: https://bit.ly/COBResolutionBill108 and https://bit.ly/HaltonRegionResolutionBill108. Many other municipalities have also passed resolutions expressing their concerns with the legislation.
Two key changes are in the areas of development charges and the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT).
Development charges are intended to ensure growth pays for growth. It doesn’t now — paying roughly 80% of the costs of growth, while taxpayers pick up the remaining 20%, for everything from community
centres to parks and transit. The changes in Bill 108 will make that worse as certain items we used to be able to collect for have been removed from the development charges and are now included in a new “community benefits” formula that is to be determined. However, that new formula has a “cap.”
If the actual costs of growth are higher, taxpayers will again have to pay the difference.
There are certainly challenges with the current development charges system and related to that is the determination of Section 37 benefits, which are cash or in-kind payments for things such as park amenities or parking — these are negotiated for extra height and density.
As noted in the MPP’s article, I have long been a critic of Section 37 benefits. However, Bill 108 does nothing to make this system better and for the reasons I noted above, it will, in fact, make it less likely that growth will end up paying for growth.
You, the taxpayer, will get the bill. Further, there is no guarantee that the savings to developers from reduced contributions to the costs of growth will, in fact, be passed on to homebuyers.
 Mayor Meed Ward was with Burlington MPP Jane McKenna and Oakville North-Burlington MPP Effie Triantafilopoulos on Canada Day – they could have had a little chat at the swearing in ceremony and gotten the facts straight then. The second change is to LPAT. The previous provincial government worked extensively with the development industry, municipal governments and citizens to reform the powers of the former Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) to overrule local planning decisions and speed up the process of approvals so that housing could get to market faster and cheaper. Bill 108 essentially reverts the LPAT back to the older OMB rules where, once again, there will be extensive hearings with lawyers and witnesses that start from the beginning of the planning process and redo all the planning analyses completed by municipal governments and their trained and knowledgeable staff.
This will add more time and more costs to the delivery of housing — the exact opposite of the stated intent of Bill 108.
It is clear that as long as the tribunal exists (in whatever form), not only will housing be more expensive and slower to market, but democratic decisions will be overruled by an unelected body. Ontario is the only province in Canada with such a tribunal — and communities across the country are successfully being built without one. It is time to eliminate the LPAT entirely, and I will be introducing a motion to Halton Regional Council on July 10.
Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT)
NOTICE OF MOTION
TO BE CONSIDERED: Council Meeting – July 10, 2019
MOVED BY: Mayor Marianne Meed Ward
SECONDED BY: Mayor Rick Bonnette
WHEREAS The Government of Ontario, on June 6, 2019, passed the More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019, (Bill 108); and
WHEREAS the changes to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT), contained in Bill 108 will give LPAT the authority to make final planning decisions based on a subjective “best planning outcome” approach rather than compliance with municipal and provincially approved official plans and consistency with provincial plans and policy; and
WHEREAS Bill 108 restricts third party appeals of plans of subdivision only to the applicant, municipality, Minister, public body or prescribed list of persons; and
WHEREAS Bill 108 takes local planning decision-making out of the hands of democratically elected municipal councils and puts it into the hands of a non-elected, unaccountable tribunal; and
WHEREAS the LPAT adds cost and delays delivery of affordable housing by expensive, time consuming hearings, contrary to the intent of the More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019; and
WHEREAS Regional and City Councils have spent millions defending provincially approved plans at the OMB/LPAT, including more than $5 million over the last three years;
WHEREAS the reverting back to de novo hearings adds delays and costs to the housing delivery, as planning decisions start from scratch requiring lawyers, experts and witnesses, repeating the planning analysis already done by local councils;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
THAT in the short term, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing immediately restore the amendments to the Planning Act that mandated the evaluation of appeals on a consistency and conformity with Provincial policies and plans basis;
THAT in the long-term the Government of Ontario eliminate the LPAT entirely, as an antiquated body that slows delivery and adds costs to housing supply via expensive and drawn out tribunal hearings;
AND THAT this resolution be forwarded to the Premier, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Halton’s Members of Provincial Parliament, Leaders of the New Democratic, Liberal and Green parties; the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Large Urban Mayors’ Caucus of Ontario, Mayors and Regional Chairs of Ontario and Halton’s local municipalities.
Finally, some facts regarding Burlington’s Official Plan (OP). As required by legislation, the City’s OP is regularly updated, including an extensive update in 2008 to incorporate the intensification measures proposed by the Province in its Places to Grow Act.
Burlington was allocated a population of 185,000 by 2031. As of the 2016 census, we were at 183,000. With known and approved developments underway and recently completed, we have already reached our population target — 12 years early.
Further, there are specific density targets that are required in certain areas of the city. Downtown Burlington is designated as an Urban Growth Centre, with a density of 200 people or jobs per hectare by 2031.
According to multiple analyses by staff, we are well on track to meeting and surpassing that density. The most recent was included in the staff report for the 421 Brant Street development, which calculates the current density at 174 people or jobs. It also states that we are well-positioned to meet or exceed the density following the existing Official Plan provisions.
I have gone into more depth and details about how the changes Bill 108 will affect Burlington residents in previous posts on my website, mariannemeedward.ca.
It is critical for residents to have accurate information, and especially for our local representatives, to have the facts of Burlington’s situation and fully understand our concerns so they can best represent our interests to the Premier and Cabinet. We will be scheduling meetings to ensure that correct information is circulated to the public and will be circulating this information publicly, as well as to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Premier.
By Pepper Parr
July 2nd, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
When the news is bad release it on a Friday and get some good news out the following week.
The good news for Burlington is that Burlington has been ranked Ranked Internationally by American Cities of the Future for Foreign Direct Investment Strategy
Burlington has received an American Cities of the Future 2019/20 Award for top Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Strategy. Placing 23rd on the list of cities, Burlington is one of only a handful of small and medium sized cities to make this distinction. More than 200 cities were considered, and Burlington is one of only four cities with a population less than 1 million. Other winning cities include New York City, Chicago, Greater Montreal, and nearby Mississauga.
Cities were assessed based on four key categories: Economic Potential, Business Friendliness, Human Capital and Lifestyle, and Cost Effectiveness and Connectivity. Business that choose to locate in Burlington leverage the highly educated talent pool of over 2 million within a 45-minute commute, regional and international transit hubs and excellent quality of life.
 Anita Cassidy, Acting Executive Director at the Burlington Economic Development Corporation (BEDC). “BEDC works very hard to attract new companies to our community and this international distinction recognizes what we have been doing for years,” said Anita Cassidy, Acting Executive Director at the Burlington Economic Development Corporation (BEDC).
“Being one of the smallest cities on this list demonstrates our competitive advantage over other regional locations and the reason businesses choose Burlington.”
In 2019 BEDC partnered with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) to provide immigration support to Burlington companies with highly qualified talent from around the world.
The BEDC team continues to partner with Toronto Global and Halton Region to attract and support businesses to invest in Burlington.
In 2017, BEDC helped Finnish Robotics company, Orfer, locate in Burlington from Finland via the soft-landing program at TechPlace, Burlington’s Innovation Centre that is led and supported by BEDC.
TechPlace provided them with office space, connections to partners, and hiring support during the first several months while they began the process of opening their first North American headquarters.
 Looking north, yards away from the Mountain Brow. Shopping Plaza on the right, engineering firm on the left. The bad news that hit the fan last week was the announcement that L3 Wescam was moving from their Burlington location to new digs in Waterdown at the intersection of highways 5 and 6.
 Looking south at the intersection of High way 5 and 6 at Clappisons Corner The site is massive and will have space for 1400 cars to park – no mention of bike racks.
The people promoting the GTA as a possible home for Amazon’s HQ2 thought Bronte Meadows would work for part of the plan. Why wasn’t the site looked at for L3Wescam? The Bronte Meadows site in Burlington was more than big enough to accommodate was Burlington wanted to do. The property, zoned as Economic Land, intended for the commercial sector, apparently wasn’t available. Paletta International has been trying for more than a decade to have the property zoned for residential.
There is a deeper story in all this somewhere – Burlington is going to have to come up with the skill sets to have land designated as employment land and used for that purpose.
In past news stories the GAzette reported the following:
Gerry Smallgange , president of Burlington Hydro pointed out that BEDC does not have a “deal maker”; has never had a “deal maker” and that the city has to re-think the way it has zoned its employment lands.
Pat Sugrue, who ran Fearman’s Pork when it was bought in November 2010 by Sun Capital Partners from Maple Leaf Foods Inc. for $20 million told a Standing Committee meeting in 2011 that Sun Capital moved very quickly and scooped another offer that was on the table because they were able to commit to the deal in seven days and close it within 45 days. Burlington hasn’t see a deal like that in the last century.
Sugre made another important point: municipal people do not, cannot and should not be in the deal making business. It takes people with skills sets that don’t exist in a municipal environment.
The L3Wescam ball got dropped much the way the International Harvester Navistar ball got dropped.
Related news stories:
BEDC has been struggling to find its way for more than five years.
L3 Wescam needed more space – and the city wasn’t able to find anything for them.
International Harvest Navistar was on their way to Mississauga when a Hamilton developer made them a better offer – they ate our lunch.
|
|
