 By Pepper Parr
January 18th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
Before they broke for the Christmas holidays a city council that had been sworn in just ten days earlier asked staff to sharpen their pencils and tell them how they would reduce the 2019 budget increase to 2%, 3% and 3.5%.
The budget they were looking at was coming in at 3.99% – and they didn’t want to have to swallow a number like that.
Council also asked staff to tell them what the impact would be of removing the 1.25% infrastructure tax levy for the 2019 budget.
Part 1 – 2019 Operating Budget Options
The options presented below largely result in decreased funding to the capital program. It is important to note that any changes to the dedicated infrastructure levy impacts both renewal projects as well as new projects in the capital program. The city’s asset management plan is about the long-term management of our existing infrastructure.
New capital assets add to the city’s base inventory and therefore increase our funding requirements for renewal needs. If we are unable to sustain our existing portfolio of assets it is recommended that we limit future expansion and/or new infrastructure. Continued investments in new or expanded assets compound our inability to financially manage our infrastructure.
Staff have provided this memo for information and have attempted to communicate the future challenges and impacts that each of the options pose.
Option A – 3.25% (0.74% tax reduction from 3.99%)
Options for service reductions are:
• Elimination of the loose-leaf collection program.
Benefits
o Ongoing operating savings of $450,000 (0.28% tax reduction) and approximately $45,000 of average annual renewal costs for the replacement of equipment.
o Allows for 2,400 staff hours to be reassigned to other program areas including parks, trails, sportsfield maintenance, and road maintenance.
o Allows for winter snow fighting equipment to be ready in November. Currently only one weekend of turnaround time between leaf collection and winter work.
 Can Burlington afford to be collecting the leaves? o Loose-leaf collection is not always completed due to onset of winter weather. This frustrates residents and challenges staff to convert equipment over to snow fighting in a timely fashion.
o Results in reduced greenhouse gas emissions from equipment operating for 6 weeks and trucking by contractor to Halton Waste Disposal site. Currently leaves are collected and trucked to a central area and later picked up by a contractor who transports them to the Halton Region transfer station where the city pays a tipping fee to dispose of the leaves.
o Halton Region provides bagged yard waste every other week from April to December.
o In lieu of this program, the city would promote more environmentally friendly options including mulching leaves on site or composting at home.
Drawbacks
o Reduced service to residents
o This will increase collection of bagged leaves by Halton Region Waste Services.
o Will require extensive public education / communication.
• 2019 capital program reduction of $750,000 for new infrastructure (0.47% tax reduction).
o Results in ongoing reduction of funding to the 10-year capital program of $7.5 million.
o The list of 2019 projects that would be impacted are:
Should this option be considered, an amendment to the 2019 capital budget would be required for the projects identified above. Future years would need to be amended as part of the 2020 capital budget.
 Nothing vital about putting the elimination of that right hand turn on hold. The removal of $7.5 million of funding from the 10-year capital budget and forecast would limit the city’s ability to address any requests for future new infrastructure. This would constrain future investments to implement recommendations resulting from the integrated transportation mobility plan, cycling master plan, school closure opportunities, and enhanced neighbourhood amenities such as splash pads and skate parks.
Option B – 3% (0.99 % tax reduction from 3.99%)
In addition to the items included in Option A, a further service reduction option is:
• Further reduction of $400,000 of funding to the capital program for new infrastructure (0.25% tax reduction).
o This would result in an ongoing reduction of funding to the capital program and require the removal of an additional $4 million of projects from the 10-year capital program.
o The remaining new / enhanced project meeting this dollar threshold is:
Should this option be considered, an amendment to the 2019 capital budget would be required for the projects identified above. Future years would need to be amended as part of the 2020 capital budget.
 The Promenade is to stretch across the downtown core – and when that core has undergone all the high rise construction it might be something to complete – but not now. The Elgin Street Promenade is included in the Core Commitment Implementation Strategy as a short term initiative to improve active transportation in the downtown and enhance the connectivity of existing pedestrian and cycling connections to the Centennial Multi-use Pathway and the Downtown Transit Terminal through the creation of an enhanced promenade with landscaping and pedestrian facilities that meet Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities (AODA) guidelines. The first three phases of this project have been competed. The final phase of this project is planned for 2019 and extends from Pearl Street to Martha Street.
The completed Elgin Promenade will create a significant piece of downtown infrastructure through an east-west pedestrian and cycling corridor that provides opportunities for active transportation including cycling connections, access to transit, walkability and accessibility and brings significant social, environmental and economic benefits to the downtown core. The promenade connects the downtown to the Downtown Transit Terminal and the Centennial Multi-use Pathway which extends northeast across the City.
Without funding for this project, the final phase of this project can not be completed and the objective of connecting the east and west sides of the downtown through a safe, accessible cycling and pedestrian connection will not be realized.
Option C – 2% (1.99 % tax reduction from 3.99%)
In addition to the items included in Options A & B, a further service reduction option is:
• Reduction of $1,610,000 of funding to the capital program for renewal (1% tax reduction).
o This would result in an ongoing reduction of funding to the capital program and require the removal of $16.1 million of renewal projects from the 10-year capital program.
Should this option be considered, an amendment to the 2019 capital budget would be required for the projects identified above. Future years would need to be amended as part of the 2020 capital budget.
The Asset Management Plan is built on the premise of being able to address the city’s infrastructure needs at the right time in the asset’s life cycle and in the most cost-effective manner. This is vital to ensure that city assets continue to provide a standard of service that residents expect and to minimize long-term costs.
Resurfacing a road at the optimum time results in a cost of 1x. Delaying this treatment begins to compromise the base materials, escalating costs to 3x the original value. Further delay results in the street requiring full reconstruction at a cost of 10x the original value. Removal of funding to the local road resurfacing program will result in sub-optimal timing of construction and cost escalation.
Deferring the renewal of community centres will also result in an increase in the total long-term costs to the City. This includes increased operating and maintenance costs as the facilities age as well as increased risk of system failures impacting service delivery. Recent examples of emergency facility closure include Appleby Ice Centre in December of 2018 and Nelson Outdoor Pool in the Summer of 2017.
Part 2 – Impact of removing 1.25% infrastructure tax levy
Staff interpreted the direction to include the impact for the 2019 budget year only with future dedicated levy increases continuing.
At a high level, the impacts associated with any reduction or removal of the dedicated infrastructure levy includes:
• Impact on the city’s asset management financing plan and the city’s ten-year capital program. Removing the 1.25% dedicated infrastructure levy for 2019 removes the equivalent of $2 million of capital projects (renewal/ new) in the budget year, and $20 million worth of capital projects over the ten-year capital program as the levy has a cumulative impact
• The removal of one year of funding leads to an unsustainable funding plan.
• An increase to the city’s unfunded renewal needs, meaning a backlog of renewal projects beyond the 2016 amount of $126.5 million that will require immediate attention. It is important to recognize that it is possible for the Unfunded Renewal Needs (URN) to grow to a point where the possibility of tackling the immediate requirements and continuing to keep pace with current needs will not be possible due to capacity constraints and unreasonably high financing requirements.
• Deferred maintenance and deferred renewal is inevitable. The result will be an increase in the total long-term costs to the City of Burlington by way of;
o increased operating and maintenance costs to prolong the life of the asset from accelerated infrastructure deterioration
o Increased rehabilitation costs due to deterioration beyond the life of the asset
o Escalation of capital costs due to required higher cost rehabilitation treatments
o Emergency, unscheduled maintenance due to system failures impacting service delivery
o Passing costs to future generations to manage existing assets
• Infrastructure renewal investment is crucial to replacing and upgrading assets to better adapt to climate change
There is a considerable amount of room to get a budget that is very close to inflation. It will take some courage for these council members – but they asked what was possible and staff set out what will be lost if the proposed budget is changed.
Do we really have to have the leaves picked up? Does the Fire Department really need a drone? Does that right hand turn elimination need to be done now – and why would we spend a dime on the Promenade when the downtown core is going to begin to become a decade long construction site in the not too distant future.
By Pepper Parr
January 10th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
First of a five part series.
Back in July of last year, before the residents of the city decided they wanted a different city council, there was a report that was discussed debated and filed. It was a discussion paper on the draft precinct plans and land use policy directions for the Aldershot GO, Burlington GO and Appleby GO Mobility hubs. The report was received and filed and will, in the near future come back to council.
Mobility hubs were put into the planning lexicon by the provincial government- they wanted to see more intensive development close to the GO stations. For Burlington that meant development in Aldershot, along Fairview next to that GO station and in he east end beside the Appleby Station.
Each of these stations has large pieces of land on which cars park while residents take the GO train to some other location.
Burlington planners didn’t seem to be fully aware of what the term a mobility hub meant; the Mayor at the time certainly didn’t have a firm grip on the concept.
Those days are behind us – those who are aware of what is going on in the city certainly understand the concept – where the differences exist is – do we want what the province is suggesting and who determines the boundaries of each mobility hub?
The mobility hubs are part of a much larger picture – there is a Strategic Plan that is going to get some tweaking to make it fit into the priorities of the new council; the Official Plan is back in the hands of the city and that will get a review that most people expect to be significantly, if not radically different than what was approved WHEN
The purpose of the report that went before a Standing Committee, was to present the draft precinct plans for the GO Station Hubs (Aldershot, Burlington and Appleby GO) and associated draft key land use policy directions for community and Council feedback and discussion. These draft precinct plans are key inputs into the creation of the Area Specific Plans (ASPs) for the three GO Station Mobility Hubs.
By undertaking secondary plans or Area Specific Plans (ASPs) for Burlington’s Mobility Hubs, the City continues to implement the objectives of the Strategic Plan and Official Plan to direct intensification, achieve transit-supportive densities and develop pedestrian and transit-oriented mixed uses areas in the downtown Urban Growth Centre and at the City’s key major transit station areas (i.e. the GO stations).
In 2014, through the Official Plan Review process, the City along with consultants from Brook McIlroy completed the Mobility Hubs Opportunities and Constraints Study, which provided a high-level analysis of each of the City’s Mobility Hubs and informed the development of the study areas for future Area Specific Planning work to be done in each of the Mobility Hubs.
In July 2016, Burlington City Council approved a staff report which outlined a work plan, allocation of staff resources and required funding to simultaneously develop four ASPs, one for each of Burlington’s Mobility Hubs. The project was approved with unanimous City Council support; most of that council is now part of the city’s history.
In December 2016, the Mobility Hubs Team undertook a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process to retain a consulting team to assist with the development of ASPs for each of Burlington’s four Mobility Hubs, with the goal of supporting the future redevelopment and intensification of these areas.
In April 2017, the Mobility Hubs team initiated the study publicly with a launch party followed by the beginning of a comprehensive public consultation program around the future vision for each of the Mobility Hubs.
 The province knew it had to upgrade the GO train service – it will become every 15 minute service in the not too distant future and the longer term plan is to electrify the system. In addition to achieving City Council’s objectives for intensification and growth, the Mobility Hub ASPs will also support the objectives of Metrolinx’s The Big Move, including the development of Regional Express Rail (RER) service, through the creation of complete communities with transit-supportive densities, as identified through the Province’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and in the Region of Halton’s Official Plan (2017).
 The Downtown mobility hub will be somewhere along John Street – making use of the small station that the Transit department once recommended be removed. Schedule 1 of The Big Move recognizes two Mobility Hubs in Burlington: the Downtown Mobility Hub is identified as an Anchor Mobility Hub and the Burlington GO Mobility Hub which is identified as a Gateway Hub. In the City’s New Official Plan, all three GO Stations and the downtown are identified as Mobility Hubs and as areas of strategic importance to accommodate the City’s future growth.
The hubs were to be where the growth was to take place which made sense. The problem was that development proposals for the downtown core began to come in that used to creation of a downtown mobility hub as part of their justification. A large number of citizens didn’t see that kind of development as ideal for the city.
The creation of a Downtown hub has been very controversial. Many feel that the creation of this “anchor” hub made it possible for developers to justify more height and density than was felt fit in with the small town feel that people wanted in the core part of the city.
Those developments became the election issue that resulted in a new council who now have to decide what they want in the way of development in the city. MArianne Meed Ward made it clear during the election that she believed the population growth expected of Burlington by the province had already been achieved.
On December 4, 2017, staff brought forward a report which presented preferred concepts and supporting technical memos for the GO Station Hubs (Aldershot, Burlington, and Appleby GO) for community and Council feedback and discussion. The preferred concepts outlined land uses and building heights within each of the three GO Station Hubs. These preferred concepts were based upon public and stakeholder feedback and were intended to prompt discussion regarding the emerging vision for each of the hubs. Since that time, staff have taken that feedback and used it to develop draft precinct plans for each hub which will be further explored in this report.
With this as background let us take a look at the plans for each of the mobility hubs and better understand what is planned and what the impact on the city is likely to be.
 The coloured shading sets out where the different forms of development could be located in the Burlington GO mobility hub, The objectives for each hub include:
- Directing the highest intensity to areas in close proximity to major transit stations and to current or planned frequent transit corridors;
- Minimizing shadowing impacts on public parks and open spaces and low density established residential neighbourhoods;
- Providing height transitions to established low density residential neighbourhoods outside of the hub boundaries;
- Providing increased permeability for active transportation options to and from GO stations;
- Providing recognition of existing cultural heritage resources;
- Creating feasible opportunities for new parks and open spaces to serve current and future residents and employees in each area;
- Identifying new and existing streets and other linkages to serve as key green, active transportation corridors to facilitate improved connectivity within, to and from the hubs;
- Creating new parks and open spaces that integrate with and enhance the existing city-wide parks and open space system;
- Providing a level of intensity to attract new retail and commercial functions to serve current and future residents and employees;
- Recognizing existing employment functions and providing for a variety of new and expanded employment and commercial opportunities;
- Planning for a variety of housing forms to attract a broad range of
- Identifying opportunities for a broad range of future public service facilities in locations that provide the greatest access to future residents and in locations that provide the greatest flexibility to accommodate a variety of functions and uses;
The Aldershot, Burlington and Appleby GO Mobility Hubs each required unique considerations with respect to the location and distribution of building typologies, parks and open space networks, public service facilities, active transportation connections, and streets based on the existing context within and around the hub, which was informed, in part, by public and stakeholder feedback.
The following objectives were developed for the Burlington GO Mobility Hub
The existing area around the Burlington Hub is comprised of large parcels in areas heavily fragmented by rail/spur lines, grade separated overpasses and underpasses and wide arterial City and Regional streets.
The study area is almost void of any existing residential uses, with the exception of the residential Paradigm development on Fairview, that will have residents in the first of five towers in the near future.
 With little to none in the way of parkland within the Burlington GO mobility hub planners are going to have to be creative and ready to do some arm wrestling with the property owners to get parkland. The area also lacks any functional parks or open spaces. Most of the properties currently contain large-scale and/or auto-centric commercial uses as well as heavy employment uses both within and adjacent to the study area.
Within the Burlington GO Mobility Hub, the following were identified as additional unique objectives for this area:
- Limiting intensity in areas within close proximity to existing industrial uses which continue to have a planned employment function; and,
- Locating the highest intensity developments in locations that will support strong active transportation and frequent transit corridor connections as well as provide new uses and amenities that will support the planned functions of both the Urban Growth Centre / Downtown Mobility Hub and the Burlington GO Mobility Hub;
Within the current and Council-adopted Official Plans, the City utilizes a precinct planning system for the Downtown in place of traditional city-wide land use designations typically found in other areas of the city. For Burlington, this precinct system allows for the recognition, and focused long-term planning of, discrete but inter-related areas, each with their own specific characteristics and/or planned role/function within a concentrated geographic area of the city.
Because of the limited geographic area within which precincts apply, precincts can provide the opportunity to establish highly detailed and customized policies and regulations to address a variety of matters specific to that area.
As a result of on-going public and stakeholder feedback, technical studies as well as discussions with Council at the December 4th, 2017 Committee of the Whole workshop, staff incorporated general changes in terms of mapping and terminology as part of the development of the draft precinct plans which are presented in this report. The following outlines these changes:
- Conceptual Streets/Public Rights-of-Way: Early-stage concepts included the identification of conceptual street locations (including both new streetsand extensions to existing streets) to improve pedestrian and cycling permeability throughout the hub as well as to enable conceptual opportunities for new development on large parcels. For the purposes of precinct planning, the majority of the conceptual streets have been removed from the mapping with only key new or extended arterial streets being retained in mapping.
The location and nature of any additional streets/public rights-of-way will be subject to the outcome of identified transportation/traffic infrastructure requirements resulting from the Mobility Hubs transportation studies and incorporated as part of future draft Area Specific Plan mapping and policies for public consultation in the new year.
- Proposed Parks and Open Spaces: Early-stage concepts included the identification of new park locations as well as the conceptual configuration of such parks. The exact configuration of parks was, in part, correlated to the conceptual street network which has been removed for the purposes of precinct plan As a result, staff have refined the mapping to identify parks with a symbol rather then an exact configuration. However, the general locations of key proposed park locations have been maintained and are reflective of staff collaboration with the City’s Parks and Open Space team.
Upon completion of a more detailed street network, staff will identify any recommended detailed park requirements, including sizes and configurations, as part of the future draft Area Specific Plan mapping and policies for public consultation in the new year.
- Community Use – Public Service Terminology: Early stage concepts included Community Use (CU) symbols to indicate the need for community use facilities in particular locations throughout the hubs. For clarity and consistency, staff have revised the terminology from Community Use facilities to Public Service facilities to align with the terminology included in the City’s newly adopted Official Plan and the terminology used in the Provincial Policy Statement. These facilities will accommodate current and future public services within the hubs including healthcare, education, emergency and protective services, cultural activities, and civic administration, among other things.
 Citizens, developer representatives and members of Council took part in the public sessions. Now retired Councillor John Taylor attended most of the sessions Since the Fall of 2017 staff have held numerous public engagement events to engage with the community about the future of the GO Station Mobility Hubs in various formats including public open houses, online surveys and individual meetings with various residents, property owners and other stakeholders.
Staff held nine (9) public open houses, three within each of the GO station hubs, to solicit feedback regarding the most recent draft precinct plans presented through this report.
Staff have identified the following recurring topics which have emerged from feedback provided by the community to-date with a corresponding staff response.
Parkland dedication requirements:
Some property owners and developers have expressed concerns regarding the potential need to provide parkland dedication to the City as part of a future development as identified in the draft precinct plans.
Staff Response:
Under The Planning Act and City of Burlington Parkland Dedication By- Law, the City is entitled to a parkland dedication from a development equaling 1.0 hectare for every 300 residential units or 2% of the total land area for commercial/industrial developments. Historically, in urban intensification cases where physical parkland was not deemed to be required, the City has exercised cash-in-lieu of parkland in accordance with The Planning Act and the City’s By-law. In the mobility hubs, physical parkland dedication will be a priority as these areas are being comprehensively planned as transit-oriented urban neighbourhoods that will accommodate a significant increase in residents and employees relative to what exists today.
The provision of new park spaces will be integral to ensuring that the mobility hubs are developed as healthy, active and livable neighbourhoods. As such staff have been highly focused on identifying new strategic park locations which would be the focus of future parkland dedications resulting from redevelopment. In identifying new strategic parks, staff have been cognizant of the potential constraints a physical parkland dedication may have on the overall redevelopment potential of a property. Working in collaboration with the City’s Parks and Open Space team within Capital Works, the precinct plans identify significant park locations within the hubs to ensure park needs for the entire hub are not borne by a single property and to also ensure that park locations are focused on larger parcels which have a greater opportunity to provide a parkland dedication while continuing to allow for significant redevelopment of the site.
Maximum height of tall buildings:
Comments have been received expressing concerns regarding the maximum height peak that could be achieved within the GO station mobility hubs.
Staff Response:
The draft precinct plans provide for a mix of building types at varying heights and intensities. The tallest and highest intensity developments are limited to the “Central” precincts proposed within each of the GO hubs.
Generally, these precincts are located in closest proximity to the GO stations themselves and rail corridor which provide for a significant separation from low density residential areas within or adjacent to the hubs. The draft precinct plans contemplate a maximum building height of 30 storeys within these precincts.
 Locations for possible mid rise buildings are defined; will developers push for more height and density?
This maximum building height is intended to recognize the significant opportunity these sites have to accommodate both population and employment growth in close proximity to higher-order transit balanced with the need to ensure that building intensity is limited so as to not permit long-term build-out of the mobility hub to be concentrated to a limited number of properties. Staff continue to review best practices from other municipalities for this precinct and continue to seek community feedback regarding this proposed maximum height for these “Central” precincts.
It must be noted that not all sites within a “Central” precinct, or any precinct contained within the mobility hub draft precinct plan, may be able to achieve the maximum building height contemplated. The ability of a development to achieve the maximum permitted height/intensity will be based on a variety of site specific considerations such as shadowing, transportation impacts and other infrastructure capacity matters, among others, which can only be properly assessed at the time of a development application.
Current and future traffic congestion:
Concerns regarding impacts of future development within the mobility hubs on traffic congestion have been raised consistently throughout mobility hub public engagement.
 The planners want to see more in the way of traffic along Fairview. Getting into the southern GO station parking lot is a challenge as it is. Staff Response:
Consultants for the Mobility Hubs project are currently undertaking transportation studies to evaluate the existing traffic conditions within each hub and the projected impacts resulting from the planned people and jobs capacity of the hubs at build-out. This information will inform staff’s development of new transportation policies and new transportation infrastructure proposed for each hub, including potential active transportation connections and new streets, which will be needed to mitigate future impacts. More detail about all technical studies being undertaken as part of the development of the Area Specific Plans, including transportation studies, are provided in Section 6.0 of this report.
Compatibility with established residential neighbourhoods:
Concerns have been raised by residents of established residential neighbourhoods both within or adjacent to each of the mobility hubs about the potential impacts of tall building on their homes and neighbourhoods.
Staff Response:
As part of staff’s development of the draft precinct plans, tall building precincts were located in strategic areas to mitigate potential impacts on any existing established residential neighbourhoods and further refined in response to public feedback received through the various public meetings held. Each of the mobility hub precinct plans also utilizes a variety of building typologies and scales of development, such as mid-rise buildings and low-rise formats, to create transitions between the tallest buildings in the hub and any established residential areas.
As staff develop detailed policies for each precinct through the Area Specific Plans, additional building design and built form requirements will be investigated and established in policy and future design guidelines, to further enhance the compatibility of developments that occur adjacent to established neighbourhoods.
These measures may include, but are not limited to, angular planes, building setbacks and landscaping buffers. In addition, compatibility matters are further reviewed and addressed on a site-specific basis at the time of a development application
Burlington GO Mobility Hub
Supply of public parks and community amenities:
It has been recognized that the Burlington GO mobility hub study area is currently absent of any public parks and community gathering spaces.
Staff Response:
Through the draft precinct plan for the Burlington GO Mobility Hub, staff have focused on identifying numerous strategic parks and potential public service sites to serve new residents and employees of the hub. Given the presence of various rail and spur lines, over/under passes and large arterial streets which result in a fragmented urban structure, staff have focused on distributing park locations and other public use functions throughout the hub to ensure all new residents and employees to this hub will have meaningful access to these integral neighbourhood amenities.
Active transportation connections and permeability:
Residents in the Glenwood Park established neighbourhood located north of the rail line and east of Burlington GO station have identified a need for additional, direct pedestrian and/or cycling connections from the neighbourhood to the Burlington GO station.
Staff Response:
New active transportation linkages have been identified in the precinct plan that would connect the neighbourhood to the GO station. These linkages would be achieved at such time as the intervening lands located between the neighbourhood and the GO station are redeveloped.
Employment land conversion
Within the Aldershot, Burlington and Appleby GO Mobility Hubs, there currently exist Locally and Regionally identified employment lands. As part of the new Official Plan process, the City studied its employment lands. As part of the “Burlington Employment Lands Policy Recommendations and Conversion Analysis Report” prepared by Dillon Consulting, both City and privately initiated employment conversions were considered. The report also included a detailed analysis with respect to employment lands in close proximity to Mobility Hubs.
 The planners have proposed some urban employment can be located near the rail line in the northern part of the Burlington mobility hub boundary. The outcome of the analysis was to establish which lands would be preliminarily recommended for conversion. It is critical to note that a recommendation for conversion does not imply that the lands are no longer intended to serve an employment function. Rather, a preliminary recommendation to convert should be understood to mean that the City wants to achieve a mix of uses including employment, commercial and residential. Equally important is to reinforce that a potential mix of uses does not necessarily include residential uses, but could include a broader range of commercial uses.
The City’s recommendations for the conversion of employment lands can be organized into two categories: those conversions to support sites with unique constraints; and, those conversions to support the emerging urban structure. Employment land conversions within the Mobility Hubs support the emerging urban structure and constitute the majority of lands and parcels recommended for conversion.
The new Official Plan presents the Area of Employment overlay which both removes and adds land from the Regional Area of Employment overlay. Lands that are proposed to be removed from the Regional Area of Employment overlay will be deferred and considered subject to the Region of Halton Official Plan Review.
The Area Specific Planning (ASP) process will proceed with planning of these lands in the context of the broader objectives of the Mobility Hubs Study and the guiding principles and unique considerations for each of the hubs. The ASP process also plans to achieve new employment uses within the Mobility Hubs which are compatible in a mixed-use context.
Area Specific Plan (ASP) Development and Timing
The development of the draft precinct plans included within this report are key inputs into the creation of the Area Specific Plans (ASPs) for the three GO Station Mobility Hubs. ASPs are plans that apply to a specific geographic area, such as the City’s four Mobility Hubs. ASPs can include a variety of studies and contain specific policies to guide future development which can form the basis of an amendment to an Official Plan. City Building staff are continuing work on the ASPs for the Downtown and the three GO Station Mobility Hubs. The work will include the development of more detailed policies which are not otherwise developed at an Official Plan level of detail. These include, but are not limited to:
- Site-specific constraints;
- Detailed heritage analysis;
- Phasing of development;
- Infrastructure capacity;
- Stormwater management including floodplains;
- Feasibility of future transportation connections;
- Additional sustainability measures;
- Area-focused community engagement;
- Implementation and incentive tools; and,
- Further area-specific design
In terms of timing, staff will be bringing forward four Area Specific Plans by Q1 2019.
ASP Technical Studies
 Some development could be added to the Leland community in the upper western part of the Burlington mobility hub.  The planners have created a new name for a precinct – “public service”. Is a school proposed for the area? Preliminary technical information regarding the projected densities; market analysis; environmental studies; stormwater, water and wastewater assessments; cultural heritage resource assessments and archeology were previously provided. . The suite of technical studies consists of the following:
Environmental Impact Studies – A scoped Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is being completed for each of the four Mobility Hubs as part of this planning study. The purpose of each EIS will be to inventory existing conditions of the natural environment (e.g., woodlands, wetlands, valleys, wildlife habitat, watercourses), identify the potential impacts that the proposed Area Specific Plans may have on these features, and develop high-level mitigation plans, where appropriate, focusing on appropriately minimizing or eliminating impacts. The proposed approach for the scoped EIS work is to focus on two key objectives:
- Identifying lands which are not suitable for development based on their significance or related constraints; and,
- Identifying opportunities for ecological restoration, as a number of the lands around the hub areas are heavily
Functional Servicing – The detailed Functional Servicing Study involves a review of the existing water and wastewater services accessible to each of the hubs; confirmation of the capacity of the water and wastewater services accessible to each of the hubs; and preparation of water and wastewater servicing concepts for each of the hubs. This study will inform the Area Specific Plans in regards to water and wastewater infrastructure capital needs.
Air, Noise & Vibration – A Pre-Feasibility Noise and Vibration Study is being completed for the Aldershot, Burlington and Appleby GO Mobility Hub study areas (note: Burlington Downtown is excluded from the Noise and Vibration Study Scope). The Noise and Vibration Study includes reviewing the noise and vibration impact of introducing new sensitive land uses in proximity to existing stationary and transportation noise sources (e.g. industrial, rail, etc.). The Study will identify potential impacts which may exist and identify areas of impact and associated potential mitigation measures which may be required within the study areas. In addition, Provincial guidelines such as the D-6 guideline for compatibility between industrial facilities and NPC-300 for stationary and transportation noise, will provide staff with an understanding of the development constraints which may exist with respect to the introduction of sensitive land uses, such as residential uses, within the mobility hubs
Air Quality Impact – An Air Quality Impact and a high-level Risk Assessment Study for the Aldershot, Burlington and Appleby Mobility Hub study areas is being completed (note: Burlington Downtown is excluded from the Air Quality Study). This Study will review the air quality impacts of introducing new sensitive land uses (clusters of future sensitive receptors) in proximity to existing stationary and transportation sources of air emissions (e.g. industrial facilities, rail, highways, etc.). The Study will review these impacts, which exist within or outside the respective Mobility Hub study areas. Results of the risk assessment will be used to develop strategies to mitigate potential air quality impacts associated with the respective Mobility Hubs.
Transportation – A transportation study is currently underway to identify future transportation needs and parking strategies for all four Mobility Hubs. This Study will review the transportation network and identify improvements and enhancements needed to support the plans and encourage multi-modal transportation solutions. The Study will review the current and planned active transportation networks and identify improvements. Further, transportation demand management (TDM) strategies and policies will be developed for each hub. This work will also include a strategic parking review to identify appropriate parking rates within the mobility hubs and strategies to achieve the desired modal splits. This work will also identify a framework to deal with the changing parking demands over time and appropriate use of off-street parking; municipal parking lots, and shared parking.
This particular study is years behind – it is a critical part of the planning decisions that have to be made
Market Analysis – A market analysis is being completed for each Mobility Hub study area to help guide the planning and urban design aspects of the project. A contextual market analysis of the City of Burlington is being completed along with a more detailed assessment of the four Mobility Hub study areas. For each station area, the assessment will include development trends, land values, and an assessment of how the study areas relate to the Burlington and GTHA marketplace. This will include assessing the nature of residential, commercial and office development including both tenant and buyer profiles. This analysis will give a broad idea of the nature of long term demand and the expected development trends looking forward.
This work will also identify other development opportunities and challenges related to development economics and feasibility, the protection/enhancement of existing employment functions, development phasing, the need for financial incentives, population and employment forecasts for the land use scenarios, and other related market considerations. This analysis will inform and ensure the Area Specific Plans are both marketable and feasible from a development and economic perspective. In addition to market inputs, this study will provide strategies and advice related to overcoming development challenges (e.g. fragmented ownership and prohibitive land values, contaminated lands, land use compatibility concerns, etc.) and achieving municipal objectives (green space, affordable housing, community facilities, appropriate housing mix, etc.).
Fiscal Impact Analysis – The intent of the Financial Impact Analysis (FIA) is to measure the operating and capital cost impacts of intensification within each of the Mobility Hubs, both individually and in aggregate, for various types of residential, non- residential, and mixed-use development. The FIA would be undertaken for City and Regional services and measure the incremental costs for new development, including new infrastructure and associated lifecycle replacement requirements.
Archaeological / Cultural Heritage – The archaeological study will provide information about the history, current land conditions, geography and previous archaeological fieldwork of the hub areas. The Cultural Heritage assessment will focus on conducting and analyzing background research and field survey results for the purposes of identifying impacts of the proposed undertaking on cultural heritage resources.
ASP Implementation
Following the completion of the Area Specific Plans, there will be an implementation phase to the Mobility Hubs project. The implementation phase of the project will include the development of a wide range of tools and detailed discussion of partnerships required to implement the area specific plans over time. This phase may include the development of zoning by-law regulations; form-based codes (i.e. development permit / community planning permit system), urban design guidelines, community improvement plans, etc. Following the conclusion of the implementation phase, it is important to note that other development processes will be required. Development processes may include applications for minor variance, site plan, site-specific zoning and/or official plan amendments or development permits.
The Downtown Mobility Hub Area Specific Planning process has been conducted concurrently to the new Official Plan process. The Downtown Mobility Hub process has resulted in new policies and schedules that have been incorporated into the new, Council-adopted, Burlington Official Plan.
Citizens can expect much more on the Downtown hub once they get into the review of the Official Plan that has been returned to the city by the Region as not being complete.
To achieve the long-term objectives of the four Mobility Hubs including transportation modal split targets, future development in the Mobility Hubs must be supported by other ongoing City initiatives. There is an important symbiotic relationship between the Mobility Hubs Area Specific Plans and the City’s Transportation Plan, Cycling Master Plan, Community Trails Strategy, the Integrated Transit Mobility Plan and the Downtown Streetscape Guidelines, all of which are necessary to ensure that the four Mobility Hubs are connected to city-wide destinations through active transportation networks, a frequent transit network and well-designed complete streets.
Conclusions:
The draft Precinct Plans for each of the GO Mobility Hubs were said to achieve key important city-building objectives including: the provision of a variety of housing forms to attract a broad range of demographics; creating opportunities for new and enhanced public parks and open spaces; the provision of sites for future community and public services; the concentration of tall buildings in proximity to higher order public transit (GO Transit) as well as the frequent transit corridors; the establishment of height peaks and built form transitions; and the provision of development permissions that will attract future population and job growth.
With a demand for more meaningful participation on the part of those who take an active interest in the kind of city Burlington is going to evolve into and a city council that has said it wants to respect the citizens that elected them – what gets built on the mobility hub sites may well be quite a bit different than what the planners have put forward to this point.
 Rosa Bustamante with Mark Bales on the left and Nick Carnacelli of Carriage Gate; the company has three developments in various stages of approvals in the downtown core. The city is at a critical transition point – whether or not this city council can pull it off is a large part of what 2019 is going to be about.
Planners Rosa Bustamante, Manager of Policy Planning – Mobility Hubs, Phil Caldwell, Senior Planner – Mobility Hubs and Kyle Plas, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner – Mobility Hubs and Samantha Romlewski, M.Pl., Planner II have been the leads on this file.
 By Staff
December 31st, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
As a result of customer feedback Burlington Transit has introduced improvements to Routes 1, 2, 5, 11, 21, 81, 87 and 101 on January 6, 2019.
 One of the new buses added to the Burlington Transit fleet. Route Changes:
• Route 1 – Schedule adjustments to improve transit rider connections to other Burlington Transit routes
• Route 2 – Schedule adjustments to better service Brant St.
• Route 5 – Buses for Route 5 will wait at the Downtown Terminal to improve transit rider connections to other Burlington Transit routes
• Route 11 – Route 11 will add one morning trip leaving the GO 407 Carpool Lot, add one evening trip departing Appleby GO, and adjust one afternoon trip to improve transit rider connections at GO stations
• Route 21 – Late-night schedule leaves Appleby GO station on the hour to improve connections at the Burlington GO station
• Route 81 – Route 81 will add another morning trip leaving Burlington GO at 5:24 a.m.
• Route 87 – Schedule adjustments to improve connections with Route 1
• Route 101 – Early morning schedule adjustments for better connections with Route 21 and 81
 By Staff
December 29th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Thank you to our Burlington Transit customers who contacted us with questions about route and schedule changes that were made in September and November this year.
As a result of feedback from customers, Burlington Transit has introduce improvements to Routes 1, 2, 5, 11, 21, 81, 87 and 101 on January 6, 2019.
Part of the Burlington Transit fleet. Route Changes:
• Route 1 – Schedule adjustments to improve transit rider connections to other Burlington Transit routes
• Route 2 – Schedule adjustments to better service Brant St.
• Route 5 – Buses for Route 5 will wait at the Downtown Terminal to improve transit rider connections to other Burlington Transit routes
• Route 11 – Route 11 will add one morning trip leaving the GO 407 Carpool Lot, add one evening trip departing Appleby GO, and adjust one afternoon trip to improve transit rider connections at GO stations
• Route 21 – Late-night schedule leaves Appleby GO station on the hour to improve connections at the Burlington GO station
• Route 81 – Route 81 will add another morning trip leaving Burlington GO at 5:24 a.m.
• Route 87 – Schedule adjustments to improve connections with Route 1
• Route 101 – Early morning schedule adjustments for better connections with Route 21 and 81
By Staff
October 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
The transit people want to improve bus arrival times and transit rider connections, they are going to make changes to bus routes that will be introduced Sunday, Nov. 4, 2018.
The schedule updates will affect routes 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 21, 25, 80, 81, and 83. Transit riders are encouraged to check updated schedules before they ride at www.tripplanner.burlington.ca
Summary of transit schedule changes beginning Nov. 4, 2018:
Routes Change
5 and 80 Routes 5 and 80 will operate as separate buses and riders will be required to transfer between Routes 5 and 80 at the Burlington GO station at 2101 Fairview St.
This change will help ensure any delays that may occur on one of these routes will not have an impact on the other route.
6 and 11 Routes 6 and 11 will operate as separate buses and riders will be required to transfer between Routes 6 and 11 at the GO 407 Carpool lot on Dundas Street, west of Walkers Line.
This change will help ensure any delays that may occur on one of these routes will not have an impact on the other route.
12 Route 12 will operate on a 30-minute schedule all day.
11, 21, 25, 81 and 83 The schedules for Routes 11, 21, 25, 81 and 83 will shift by five minutes to improve transit rider connections at GO stations.
Updates to Burlington Transit schedules will result in more frequent bus service along Brant Street as riders will be able to take Routes 3 or 5 between downtown and the Burlington GO station.
 Sue Connor, Director of Burlington Transit with Jim Young an advocate for free transit for seniors one day a week. Sue Connor, Director, Burlington Transit imported from Brampton is betting that the “schedule changes represent another opportunity to improve Burlington’s Transit service. The updated schedules will help to ensure buses are arriving on time so that riders can make their transit connections to travel through our city.”
Connor is continually reported to have done a great job in Brampton. Let’s hope that can be achieved here as well.
There is in Burlington, a citizens group that approached the transit people with an idea: How about aving a bus that runs up and down Brant – with no particular schedule. It would be a hop on – hope off. And free.
The transit people said they didn’t have a bus that could be dedicated to an experiment like that. One wonders how people would take to the idea of being able to stand at a bus stop – get on the bus and go anywhere you wanted on Brant Street.
Burlingtonians are married to their cars. The only way they are going to evolve to transit users is if they are given a chance to try the service and find that it is convenient.
By Staff
October 3rd, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
BFAST’s news release earlier today said City Council defeated a motion to provide a pilot project for free fares for seniors by a vote of 6-1. The actual result was 4-3, with Mayor Goldring and Councillors Meed Ward and Lancaster in favour.
 Burlington for accessible Sustainable Transit (BFAST) says the results of its candidates’ survey on transit policy could mean a change for the better. The group surveyed all Burlington mayoral and council candidates and endorsed Marianne Meed Ward for mayor.
“Marianne has been in the trenches, fighting for decent transit service in the face of a wall of opposition,” said Doug Brown, BFAST chair. “While the other candidates are not necessarily hostile to transit, Marianne’s record speaks for itself.”
DROP GRAPHIC IN HERE
 An unhappy transit user venting before the Director of Transportation Vito Tolone and Mayor Goldring. BFAST welcomed the priority that both mayoral city council candidates are giving to transit in their survey answers and platforms.
“We were pleased at the fresh perspectives many of the candidates brought to the issue,” said Brown. “We sincerely thank everyone for their participation and congratulate them for participating in the electoral process as candidates.”
Thirty-three of the 37 candidates favoured establishing transit service before new developments were built. Twenty-nine favoured a pilot project offering free transit for seniors during off-peak hours, a proposal the present council defeated 6-1.
The survey results, and BFAST’s recommendations, are public at https://bfastransit.org/election-2018.
 Joey Edwarth, President of Community Development Halton, Mayor Goldring and on the far right Doug Brown of Bfast. Mayor is checking out a transit cell phone app. The survey was conducted by email in late August and early September. All 37 of the mayoral and council candidates submitted responses. In some cases, the responses came with extensive comments, which BFAST published in full. Email addresses for the candidates were obtained from the city’s election website.
BFAST, established in 2012, is a citizens’ group that promotes public transit in Burlington. It is the lead organizer in the annual Transit Users’ Forum, delegates to city council and staff, provides information to transit researchers and works with other community groups to improve Burlington’s transit system.
###
 By Andrew Drummond
October 3rd, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Last Wednesday, Ontario Minister of Labour, Laurie Scott announced that Ontario would not follow through on its commitment to raise the minimum wage to $15 on January 1, 2019. The new Ford administration argued that “The increase of 20 per cent this year was a lot for businesses to absorb so we’re putting a pause on the minimum wage,” Scott said. “What we’re doing is that businesses have the chance to catch up but we’re also helping the low-income people in Ontario with tax breaks,”.
The regressive position of the Ford government contrasts with the actions of the government of Alberta which on October 1, raised its minimum wage to $15 across the province. Alberta’s Labour Minister, Christina Gray claimed “Going forward, we know that paying a little bit more to workers will provide greater stability, lower turnover, more loyalty,” she said. “We hear that a lot from businesses that pay at or above that higher minimum wage — that there is a benefit in retention and lower training costs.”
The argument from the Ontario government and other fiscal conservatives is that business has been hurt by the increases in minimum wage and that has caused them to scale back on part time jobs, hurting the most vulnerable. “Employers are finding it hard to cope with the precipitous rise in the minimum wage. In response, they’re cancelling part-time jobs.” said Minister Scott in an editorial for the Financial Post. This statement raises the following questions: What is the reality of this assertion? What impact did the proposed wage raise have on businesses in Ontario and specifically in Burlington?
 The evidence is so far inconclusive. In Ontario, 51,000 jobs were lost in January. Many critics of the minimum wage increase incorrectly pointed to this as evidence of the detrimental effect of the policy – however the data told a different and more nuanced tale. In additional to the confusion over the data there was also anecdotal evidence showing that some companies (notably Tim Horton’s franchises) had dramatically scaled back their employment immediately on January 1 as response to the implementation of $14 as a minimum wage.
However, there was not nearly as much focus on the employment numbers after January to measure the long-term effect of the policy. When we look past the January employment figures, we see a different picture emerge. For example, in February, Ontario gained 16,000 jobs. In March another 10,000 were added. By July, Ontario had gained 132,000 jobs since the end of January, more than offsetting the gut jerk reaction from employers when the minimum wage came out. Ontario currently has the lowest unemployment rate it has had over the past 5 years at 5.4%. The argument that employment has struggled under a higher minimum wage appears to be disconnected from the actual employment figures.
 For Burlington specifically, we need to understand what a living, rather than minimum wage should be. Living Wage Halton has done an exceptional job of figuring out what the minimum value needed to live here is. They take into account a 4 person family with limited expenses. The family does all its travel on public transit, needs only limited childcare for 1 of 2 children, and has a meagre entertainment budget (a weeklong camping trip and once a year to the zoo). This is measured against the current values of food, housing, and services in Halton to compute what exactly the 2 adults need to earn on a 40 hour workweek to support this family.
 The current value for the Halton region is $17.95 an hour. This amount represents the bare minimum that a person needs to make while working full time and supporting a family on two incomes. Against that value, the current $14 Ontario minimum wage is clearly inadequate. A family with minimum wage earners would have a shortfall of $15,800 in their yearly budget just to make ends meet. To cover this shortfall, the family would need additional earnings from part time jobs that made up 22.5 hours a week. While there are obviously some assumptions made here in the makeup piece, (taxes would be lower for example) a family should not need many hours of part time work just to have a meager lifestyle.
 The question is then can Burlington businesses afford it? What has been the local result of the increase to $14/hour? There is relatively little unemployment data available at the city level. However, the 2016 census put Burlington’s unemployment at 5.7%, or 1.7% lower than the province as a whole. So Burlington is relatively well off compared to Ontario at large. Extrapolating, if Ontario gained jobs despite (or because of) a minimum wage increase, it is possible that Burlington did as well.
To test this theory, I conducted an informal survey of a number of plazas in Burlington over the past three weeks. At every one of them, there were multiple companies looking to hire. As far as I can tell, every Tim Horton’s in the city is looking for more people, and many clerical/retail opportunities exist as well. If the minimum wage hike had done such damage, why are there so many businesses still looking for people willing to work at that wage?
What all this means is that the closer the minimum wage gets to $17.95 in Halton, the better off all families and by extension our entire community will be. The caveat on this is that it only works if business can sustain it. The evidence is overwhelming that businesses adapted to the $14 minimum wage, and they would certainly be able to adapt to $15 as well.
Businesses are doing Ok, so it’s time to make sure families are doing Ok too.
 Andrew Drummond was the New Democratic candidate for Burlington in the most recent provincial election.
 By Staff
August 31st, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
The Halton District School Board will be welcoming approximately 64,000 Kindergarten to Grade 12 students on the first day of school on Tuesday.
The Board’s 6,507 teachers, 3,117 non-teaching and support staff, and 222 principals and vice-principals are outfitting classrooms, tending to sports fields, polishing floors, cleaning buildings and organizing schedules to prepare schools for another productive and memorable school year.
 New cladding on the sides of the high school and repairs to the roof are part of the work done at MMR during the summer. The controversial transferring of Lester B Pearson students to M.M. Robinson High School starts on Tuesday as well. During the summer, MMR underwent some renovations to improve the educational experience for all students as the two schools merge into one community. The school’s Community Pathways Program (CPP) space has been re-constructed, new locker bays installed throughout the building, the theatre’s facade re-designed and renamed the Lester B. Pearson Community Theatre and new cladding added to part of the outdoor front facade, in addition to other improvements.
Students, staff and parents/guardians will also walk into many other Halton schools that underwent various renovations and upgrades this summer. Approximately $25 million worth of construction projects were completed at dozens of elementary and secondary schools. Work included roofing improvements, ventilation, new entranceways, windows, doors, flooring and washrooms, and more.
Over the summer, the HDSB transitioned to a new Student Absence Reporting system called SchoolMessenger. Families can register for SchoolMessenger through the website (go.schoolmessenger.ca) or the HDSB Mobile App. Resources and training videos to support parents/guardians with the transition to SchoolMessenger are available on the HDSB website (hdsb.ca) by searching “SchoolMessenger”.
This new system enables parents/guardians to receive app notifications, text messages, emails and phone calls from schools and the HDSB. Families will now be able to report absences for their child using the HDSB Mobile App, the SchoolMessenger website or a toll-free phone number.
The HDSB Mobile App, rolled out earlier this year, consolidates important information for parents/guardians and students into one easy-to-access location. Report absences, receive school and Board news, social media and calendars all in one place. The HDSB Mobile App is available for download on the App Store and Google Play by searching “HDSB”.
 By Pepper Parr
August 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Lisa Kearns met with her community last night – she wanted to update them on where things were with developments in the ward and talk to them about her stand on most of the problems as she sees them.
It was clear that Lisa Kearns is for development – but the right kind of development.
 Lisa Kearns talking to participants at her public meeting and handing out her T-shirts. She has taken the position that the Carriage Gate development on the north east corner of James and Brant is a done deal. Her concern now is how does the community handle that construction – how long will there be serious disruption to how people use the downtown core which she defines as from the Lakeshore Road north to Caroline.
Kearns told the meeting that the Burlington Downtown Business Association and the Burlington Economic Development Corporation are working together on a study to come up with ideas to keep the downtown core vibrant.
 The Bentley, nearing completion on John Street is the first of a three phase development. Above ground parking and a medical building on the north at Caroline are to follow. Kearns thinks this is a great development. Kearns pointed to the three phase Carriage Gate development on John Street that she thinks is great. It combines a location for new community services (in this case medical) has space for commercial tenants and will have significant above ground parking. She said she understands that 27% of the units in the Bentley are to be affordable housing. That does not appear to be the understanding of the developer.
One of the small pieces of good news is that there may be a solution to what was going to be serious traffic congestion on John Street at the downtown mobility hub with at least six transit routes going into and leaving the transit station and cars from the Revenue Properties and Carriage development emptying onto the same street.
 All those dotted lines are but routes that swing through the downtown mobility hub. Moving the transfer station north to ancempty lot at the corner of Caroline and John is said to be in the works. Kearns told her audience that it appeared the property at the corner of John and Caroline that is now an empty lot will be made the transfer point for people who want to change buses. That transferring is now done at the location of the transit terminal on John Street just north of Pine.
Sounds like a sensible decision – nothing from city hall on this yet.
 Lisa Kearns: Talks like a ward Councillor Kearns looks and talks like the ward Councillor. She is in constant touch with the bureaucrats and used phrases like “I will take care of you” – “I’ve already been doing that.”
Kearns believes the downtown core – from Lakeshore to Caroline – is going to lose much of its character.
She appears to be basing her campaign on a sustainability lens – everything that gets done should be done through a sustainability lens – does what we want to do add to the sustainability of the community. Her message was that we need to re-think the way we do things.
Members of the audience were able to pick up Lisa Kearns lawn signs – and advised that they cannot be put up until September 7th.
Transportation and the study that seems to be taking forever to make it to the public drew this comment from Kearns: “Phony baloney – they don’t know what they are doing.”
That’s as blunt and direct as a candidate can be.
Expect more of that from Kearns who is going to be an interesting debater during the all candidate debates taking place for each ward.
By Pepper Parr
July 25th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Part two of a two part article on a proposed development in the east end of Burlington,
When the plans for the re-development of the Lakeside Village Plaza were shown to the public last week it wasn’t what many people thought they were going to see.
The presentation had large posters showing what would go where.
Two of the three candidates running for the ward 5 city council seat were in the room; Councillor Sharman worked one end of the room while retired school principal Mary Alice St. James worked the other end.
 Councillor Paul Sharman explaining the development. Councillor Sharman has been working to get some development of the site since his first year as a city Councillor – few thought that this was what Sharman had planned for the community.
St. James has made it clear that she doesn’t like the height and she isn’t pleased with the length of time it will take to complete the project. This could be as much as a decade – great for sidewalk superintendents but not what those who want a “peaceable Kingdom”.
If approved by city council the site will consist of nine buildings and underground parking with some of the structures reaching 19 storeys into the sky.
 Nine buildings will be on the site – they range froma single story to 19 storeys. The Plan has five phases that will take years to be completed.
The information before the public at this point comes from a Justification report prepared by professional planners who were hired by the developer, Glanelm Property Management.
The city’s role up to this point is to ensure that all the required reports are received and the required fees are paid. Glenelm has paid the city $235,052.50 and the Region $9,184.72.
 Dana Anderson – planning consultant for the developer. At this point data and information is coming from the developers planner. Residents haven’t had a chance to hear what the city has to say. The ward Councillor is in love with this project – it is something he had been pushing almost from the first day he was elected.
Ward 5 candidate Mary Alice St. James said: “The Lakeside Plaza is an example of why I put my name forward as a candidate as Ward 5 Councillor. Throughout Ward 5 there are intensification proposals for Lakeside Plaza, Appleby Village, on vacant land ripe for development and in the south end of Ward 5 where older homes are being swooped up to be over-intensified, over-massed.
 Mary Alice St. James – pulling in the votes. 1- Lakeside Plaza is a tired plaza that requires a much needed, as soon as possible update.
2- This first draft is too high, too dense with too many buildings with too big a span, all of which is too close to the abutting streets and current residents.
3- The City of Burlington needs to oppose this first draft.
The developers Justification report talks in terms of “taking into account efficient sequencing of site servicing, ensuring adequate access and parking is provided for uses that operate during the redevelopment process and facilitating the relocation of existing tenants to new portions of the site with minimal disruption to business operations.”
Phase 1 includes the demolition of the north-west corner of the existing plaza structure and the construction of a 6 storey residential structure with 3 levels of underground parking (Block B) facing Kenwood Avenue. Access Lane A will also be constructed at this time which will provide shared access to the Subject Lands and Skyway Arena. A second access will be introduced on Kenwood Avenue along with the associated Access Lane B which, through future phases, will connect to corresponding driveway access on Hampton Heath Road.
 Where the buildings are to be located with parking and green space at the ground level Phase 2 will see the demolition of the remainder to the west wing of the plaza and the construction of a 1 storey commercial podium facing Lakeshore Road with two residential tower elements on top with 13 (Block E) and 13 (Block F) storey heights. A 5 storey residential structure will link the two towers, the top of which will correspond with a further building step back on both tower elements. A 1 storey restaurant building (Block A) will be attached to the podium building facing Kenwood Avenue. Access Lane B will be extended to the middle of the Subject Lands.
Existing Access Lane D which provides access to Lakeshore Road will be improved with sidewalks and landscaping. The parking area north of Block E and F will be reconfigured and improved with landscaping and sidewalks.
Phase 3 will see the demolition of the eastern portion of the commercial plaza. The 1 storey grocery store will be redeveloped with an attached 4 storey retail and office building. A landscaped public amenity area will be created in front of Block I. The surface parking area in front of Block I and the grocery store will be reconfigured, providing landscaping and sidewalks. The service lane at the rear of the property will also be improved at this time.
That grocery store redevelopment – where will people shop while that is being done?
 The view of the development from Hampton Heath looking west. Phase 4 will see the removal of the remaining central portion of the commercial plaza and the construction of a 1 storey commercial podium with two residential tower elements (Blocks C and D), both 10 storeys in height. The two tower elements will be linked by a 3 storey residential structure, the top of which will correspond with a further building step back on both tower elements. The parking area in front of the blocks will also be reconfigured, landscaped and improved with sidewalks. A public amenity area will be constructed in front of Block D and a pedestrian only mews created between Blocks D and I. Access Lane A will also be extended up to the mews.
Phase 5 will replace an existing surface parking area with a 1 storey commercial podium facing Lakeshore Road with two residential tower elements on top with 17 (Block G) and 9 (Block H) storey heights. A 5 storey residential structure will link the two towers, the top of which will correspond with a further building step back on both tower elements. A landscaped pedestrian path into the Subject Lands will be provided between Block H and the abutting Scotiabank property.
 This is what the development will look like when completed. All the buildings front onto Lakeshore Road. The proposed redevelopment will see the phased implementation of a 3 storey underground parking garage for all portions of the Subject Lands where new buildings are proposed. The garage will be constructed as the corresponding above grade portion of each phase is constructed.
The proposed redevelopment has carefully considered these guiding principles in its design. The redevelopment is an efficient use of land through intensification at an appropriate location in the City and advances the Province’s growth objectives while balancing other objectives of the OP. The redevelopment will also be appropriately phased to ensure these principles are continued to be addressed in the implementation of the development.
The proposed redevelopment conforms to the City’s policy direction for land use by providing for a redevelopment on an under-utilized site in an existing neighbourhood. The redevelopment provides for a mix of housing and also maintains the planned function for the existing commercial centre.
 The view of the development from Kenwood looking east. The Official Plan seeks to achieve a number of goals for new development with respect to urban design including compatibility with existing neighbourhoods while promoting higher densities and compact built form. The buildings are proposed to be located on the site in such a way as to provide a gradation in height and density. The highest buildings (at 18 storeys) are located along Lakeshore Road, a Minor Arterial road, opposite apartment buildings ranging in height from 5 to 19 storeys.
The building heights in the proposed development decrease moving away from Lakeshore Road. A 14 storey building is proposed along Kenwood Avenue opposite the existing Husky Gas station and commercial plaza.
A 6 storey building is proposed further north along Kenwood Avenue, opposite which are two storey townhouses. Two 11 storey buildings are proposed abutting the northerly lot line which abuts the park. These buildings will face the existing Skyway Arena and Park. The existing one storey grocery store will remain at its current location with a 4 storey addition along its westerly fa ade to provide for additional retail and office units. The distribution of heights and densities allows the proposed development to fit into the existing urban fabric and provides appropriate transition to minimize impacts on the surrounding residential land uses.
The Subject Lands are just under 4 ha and represent a significantly large redevelopment area which allows for a distribution of heights throughout the site. Given that the one storey height is being maintained for the grocery store and restaurant in Block A, it is appropriate to transfer what could have been 11 storeys in height on that Block to additional storeys on the buildings along Lakeshore Road (where taller buildings are more context-appropriate given the arterial road frontage and existing taller buildings to the south).
Cute!
There are a number of hoops that every development application has to go through. The developers planners spend a lot of time making sure that they comply as much as possible –and where their compliance is a little on the short side – the find a justification for a change in the zoning.
The proposal is consistent with Provincial Policy Statement 2014 (but not with 2017)
The proposal conforms to the Growth Plan, 2017
The proposal conforms to the Halton Regional Official Plan, 2015 and the inforce city of Burlington Official Plan, except those sections proposed to be amended.
The proposal is in conformity with the general direction of the proposed intensification framework set out in the draft city of Burlington Official Plan dates April 2018.
They don’t say they are in conformity – they say they are in conformity with the “general direction”.
 Not convinced yet. The proposal can be adequately serviced and does not create any adverse impacts to the existing site and surrounding areas.
The proposal is well served by existing community infrastructure including public transit, bike lanes, parks, schools, places of worship and an arena
The proposal enhances the pedestrian environment within the site and along the exterior street frontages and along the exterior street frontages.
The proposal is in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood, provides an opportunity for intensification within the Built Up Area, preserves and upholds the overall urban structure as set out in the in-force OP and would implement the proposed urban structure set out in the Officasl Plan Review.
Careful here – the Justification report appears to want it both way – the development upholds what is required by the existing OP and would implement what was in the draft OP that has yet to be approved and will not apply to this development.
In the notes taken when the public met in a visioning session in 2015, the vast majority of the comment talked in terms of three, four and maybe six storey buildings. There was one mention of high density towers (25 storeys),
This development is for the most part legal – they can do what they want to do.
Related new stories:
The early concept.
By Pepper Parr
July 9th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
City council will be debating a staff recommendation for the proposed development on Brant street, opposite city that starts on the SW corner of James and will run south to Kellys Bake Shop and include the full block.
The developer is asking for 27 stories – the city planners are recommending 18.
 Approved. The development on the NW corner of Brant and James has been approved at 23 storeys – why are the planners recommending 18 storeys for the second building when the one across the street has been approved for 23 – seems like a reasonable question – and for the developer it is a difference of six floors of condominium units
The 421 – 431 Brant Street development – it hasn’t been given a name yet – has been approved and will consist of:
• Twenty-three (23) storey building, which includes a 1-storey rooftop amenity area;
• Four-storey podium;
• 760 square metres of ground floor retail / commercial space;
• 365 square metres of 2nd floor office space;
• 169 residential units (maximum);
• A parking ratio of 1.2 parking spaces per residential unit in the below-grade parking structure, in addition to 8 dedicated visitor parking spaces and 1 car share space;
• Appropriate building setbacks from Brant Street (2.95 metres), James Street (2.6 metres) and John Street (1.8 metres);
• A 128 square metre (16 metre x 16 metre) visibility triangle (publicly accessible open space) at the corner of Brant Street and James Street;
• Appropriate building stepbacks and terracing above the 4th floor and above the 18th floor
The planners point out that the site is located within the Downtown Urban Centre and within the Downtown Core designation. They add that it “is important to note that the existing OP (that is the one in place before the Grow Bold OP – which was approved and sent to the Regional government for approval at that level), included a site specific exception for a portion of the site (421 – 427 Brant Street) which recognized the site as appropriate for increased height and density.”
What that means is that part of the land assembled for the development had an exception attached to it for height above the permitted heights for neighbouring properties. The way these things work is that the highest height is frequently applied to all the properties when they are assembled.
“The exception set an increased maximum height for the site of seven storeys with taller buildings up to a maximum height of twelve storeys permitted where they provide a sense of compatibility with surrounding land uses and a sense of pedestrian scale by the use of terracing above the second floor. The exception for 421 – 427 Brant Street also set out an increased maximum floor area ratio of 4.5:1, except that higher floor area ratios were permitted subject to community benefits provisions.”
“It is also important to note that the timing of the 421 Brant Street application preceded emerging policy directions for the Downtown Urban Growth Centre, which are now incorporated as a part of the Council Adopted Official Plan: Grow Bold.
 The view from Civic Square looking east at the two “landmark” towers. The one on the left (shown as a shadow) has been approved. The one on the right is before Committee of the whole today – planners want this one cut back to 18 storeys. “On Sept. 28 2017, the draft new Downtown Mobility Hub Precinct Plan was presented to Council for the first time for discussion and feedback at a Council Workshop at the Committee of the Whole. No decisions were made.
“On November 13, the 421 Brant Street applications were approved in principle.
“On November 30, 2017 a staff report on the Draft Downtown Precinct Plan and proposed Official Plan policies contemplated modifying the building height permissions at Brant Street and James to recognize that node as an area appropriate for landmark buildings and to reduce the building height permissions in the Cannery Precinct for the property located at Brant Street and Lakeshore Road in light of the 421 Brant Street application.”
What the city did was decide to live with height across from city hall and limit height along Lakeshore Road. Councillor Taylor was very specific when he said that he went along with the 23 storeys for 421 Brant on the understanding that Lakeshore heights would be limited to 17 storeys. That’s planning on the fly!
 There is a lot of detail in this map- you can identify the precincts that planners use to describe parts of the city and the kind of development permitted. The Revenue Properties application (409 Brant) now has to find a way to work through and around a thicket of precinct plans, mobility hubs, the Urban Growth Centre and transit issues.
 Those red lines are the buses that come down Brant and loop along James into the bus terminal that got an upgrade and is now called a Mobility hub anchor. Traffic nightmare! And, speaking of transit issues – there is a drawing that was part of one of the staff reports on the 409 project that showed the number of bus routes that flow into John Street, which is the street the garages for both 409 and 421 will exit onto – there is a nightmare of a continual traffic jam waiting to happen.
“No Staff/Council motion was made to increase height permissions in the Special Planning Area at Brant and James Streets as a result of the approval of the 421 Brant application on November 13th, 2017.”
What that seems to say is that the height 421 was given isn’t going to be available to 409. It is going to be interesting to see how that works out.
The Revenue Properties proposal is before Planning and Development Committee on Tuesday -July 10th in the afternoon and in the evening.
By Pepper Parr
June 25th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
With the provincial election out of the way – we will figure out just what kind of a government we are going to have in the weeks and months ahead.
The political focus now shifts to the municipal sector. The 2018 election is going to be a lot different that the one that took place in 2014.
There is an excellent collection of candidates across the board for the municipal side. There is next to nothing new on the Board if Education side – we will leave that to a future news story.
What Burlington is now seeing is a group of younger people who are smart and want to see things done differently. They care about their city in a much different way than most of the current council. They are open to new ideas and they are putting new ideas forward.
Several have excellent web sites. Some of the candidates are digging into their own wallets and self -funding their campaigns.
It is a little difficult to keep up with all the campaigns. The Gazette is continually scanning the various candidate web sites and looking for imaginative ideas and solutions to problems the city faces put forward by some of the candidates.
 Roland Tanner, candidate for the ward 2 city council seat. Roland Tanner, a candidate in ward 2 and one of the people involved in the creation of the Shape Burlington Report in 2010 has some thoughts on how the city is going to fund transit.
The first big plus is that Tanner actually wants to see transit funded – not something one could say about the current council.
In a report he released on his web site (https://rolandtanner.ca/) Tanner said: “Thanks in large part to community groups like Burlington for Accessible Sustainable Transit (BFAST), which came into being to protest against transit funding and service cuts made in 2012, Burlington City Council has recently been indicating an increased commitment to investment in Burlington Transit, hand in hand with commitments of $45 million in funding from the provincial and federal governments for Burlington alone. As a result, the Burlington Transit Users’ Forum was characterized by cautious optimism in April.
Tanner want to be sure that the incoming provincial government commits to not reducing the 2 cent gas tax transfer to municipalities?
Tanner points out that those funds “could be threatened by the 10 cent gas tax promised by the incoming provincial government. The 10 cent cut will reduce the overall gas tax received by the province from 14 cents a litre to 4 cents. Of that 4 cents, the province is obliged to pass 2 cents per litre to Ontario municipalities. That means 50% of the remaining gas tax will be going to the cities, not the province. Is it realistic to think the provincial government will be willing to let that continue to happen?
 Roland Tanner – a member of the Shape Burlington report committee. There is in in the conclusion Tanner makes that the 10 cent per litre savings Doug Ford said he would give citizens has the potential to come out of the hide of the transit sector.
Tanner asked City Hall to provide exact details of the financial implications of the gas tax transfer being repealed, and they kindly provided them. In the 2017-18 fiscal year gas tax funding for Burlington amounted to: $2,262,568
Tanner concludes that if the gas tax funding from the province is changed the city would have to increase taxes by 1.47 percent, in order to keep transit funding static.
He adds that: “If Burlington is to grow successfully, it is essential that Burlington Transit receives the investment it needs to provide a better service. City Hall should be acting as soon as possible to ask the provincial government to commit to maintaining the municipal gas tax transfer at 2 cents per litre, and oppose any attempt to download provincial government cuts onto municipalities.”
In a May Toronto Star Letter to the Editor Tanner write:
Until the City of Burlington adopts a much more courageous approach to citizen engagement, Burlington will keep finding itself in a cycle of worsening resentment and distrust towards City Hall and council. Such an approach was recommended by the 2010 Shape Burlington Report, which called on City Hall to ‘re-invent itself’ in order to empower citizen-led entities – community councils, advisory committees and panels chosen by civic lottery – that act a ‘”on ramps” to participation’ for people who otherwise don’t get involved city affairs.
A previous Progressive Conservative government downloaded the cost of a a bunch of services to the municipal sector. Are we about to see this happen again?
Contacting Tanner:
Web site: https://rolandtanner.ca/
Email roland@rolandtanner.ca
Telephone 289 259 4023
Facebook: https://facebook.com/roland4ward2
Follow on Twitter: https://twitter.com/roland4ward2
Related links:
The Shape Burlington Report.
 By Staff
May 21st, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
The City is holding its annual Touch-a-Truck event on Saturday, May 26 from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the city’s Roads, Parks and Forestry facility at 3330 Harvester Rd.
 If the weather is good taking the kids out o see the equipment is a fun and inexpensive way to spend a day. The event gives residents and their families an opportunity to:
• Get an up-close look at city vehicles, including a street sweeper, snow plow and fire trucks
• Take a tour around the neighbourhood in a city bus
• Experience what it’s like to operate a backhoe in a simulator
• Visit the forestry booth to speak with staff on what’s invading our trees.
The equipment is used to maintain 121 city parks, 134 recreational fields, and 109 playgrounds as well as maintaining 69 bridges, 117 culvert structures, 600 kilometres of mainline storm sewers as well as catch basins and creeks
 A photo op for the kids – part of the annual Touch a Truck event. Managing operations include, the design and inspection of road reconstruction, inspecting and maintaining city-owned trees, maintaining and repairing the city’s fleet of vehicles, the operation of Burlington Transit and animal control services through the Burlington Animal Shelter.
The event is part of National Public Works Week, dedicated to public works employees who maintain the roads, parks, trees and benefit from one of the richest pension and benefit plans in the country.
 By Pepper Parr
May 11th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Jim Young was doing it again.
Making statements that made people uncomfortable. His kind of truth is a little difficult to take. At time people want to suggest to Jim that he “lighten up”.
He was delegating Thursday afternoon on the matter of the LaSalle Park Marina and the need for a spend of $4 million to keep the place open past April of 2019.
Jim Young said:
“My delegation on behalf of Engaged Citizens of Burlington today is a plea for common sense. A plea for fiscal responsibility and a request to consider more appropriate ways to allocate funding so that the community benefit of that spending is more evenly spread and put to better uses.
 Jim Young “ECoB worries that $4 million is a lot of money to spend to help protect the private property of a small group of citizens who are surely among the most able to provide that protection and insurance for themselves.
“We worry that our city may invest this $4 million only to find that the property at La Salle Park reverts to the City of Hamilton in a few years.
“In a city where last fall we had to provide emergency funding to keep our transit system operating legally, might better use be made of that $4 million by our transit system?
“In a ward that has no community centre for seniors, children or adult recreation, might $4 million be better directed towards their needs?
“In city with another 2 wards which similarly have no community centre, might we better serve more of our citizens by allocating this money to that end?
“In a city committed to intensification with so far no supporting Transit Infrastructure in place or planned, that money would allow an 8% increase in the Transit Operating Budget for each of the next 5 years to help achieve those intensification plans. Might this be a better investment?
“In a city committed to increasing and improving cycling with a plan to provide a safe North / South Highway and Railroad Crossing might $ 4 million go a long way to building that?
“Can a city that rejected a $100,000 annual expenditure to provide free off peak transit to around 35,000 poor and isolated seniors, in all conscience, justify $4 million dollars to provide docking improvements for a few hundred fairly wealthy boaters?
“That money would provide free transit for seniors for the next 40 years.
“The people of Burlington are engaged and paying attention to city affairs like never in recent history.
 The option the LaSalle Park Marina Association hopes is chosen through the Environmental Assessment due March 2013. “By adopting Option A and removing yourselves from the Marina Business you can demonstrate that you are sensitive to and attuned to the needs and wishes of ordinary Burlingtonians for whom a boat is a luxury while Transit, Community Centres and Cycling are real and widespread needs.
“At the end of the day La Salle Park Marina is not the city’s business to be involved in. It belongs to an incorporated body, La Salle Park Marina Association on land that belongs to the City of Hamilton and which may very soon revert to that city.”
The members of the Burlington Boating and Sailing Club and the LaSalle Park Marina take exception to being referred to as “rich people” who are being given a benefit that others don’t get.
Membership in the Marina is $9200 – up front. $5200 of that is an initiation fee and $4000 is part of the annual fee structure that has a declining balance approach. The two clubs don’t talk all that much about fees and what it costs to be a member.
They tend to dwell on the benefits the city gets and wonder aloud why a city on the edge of one of the largest lakes in the country should not have a marina.
To their credit the Marina has entered into joint ventures with the city for more than 35 years and has never defaulted or even been late with a payment. They want recognition for what they have done.
The issue gets complex with a deadline for the new breakwater the sailors must have and what that will do to the formation of ice in the winter and what that will do to the Trumpeter swans that have taken up residence in the same location as the marina.
 Trumpeter swan – magnificent creatures that many think need the marina space at LaSalle Park to survive the winters. Nonsense according the Marina Association. What the boaters face are overfed swans that should not be fed by the public who love the birds.
The swan people would like to see the boats somewhere else – the sailors feel the same way about the swans.
Meanwhile Burlington is unable to come to terms with the city of Hamilton on a price for the water lots that Hamilton owns.
It is messy – and the leadership needed isn’t coming out of city hall.
$4 million is a lot of money – but the LaSalle Park Marina has always met their obligations under the Joint Venture agreements they signed with the city.
Which is more than the Trumpeter Swan people can say when it comes to educating the public about not feeding the swans and then doing something to actually prevent that – maybe having one of their group on hand every weekend telling people not to feed the swans?
 By Staff
May 1st, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Three Liberal members of government – two federal and one provincial – lined up at the Burlington GO station to announce that the federal and provincial governments are contributing approximately $93.5 million to accelerate the purchase of 53 bi-level coaches that will be used to support the expansion of Metrolinx’ GO Rail service.
 Burlington MPP Eleanor McMahon announcing the plans to add 53 bi-level GO trains to the Lakeshore Line The politicians describe themselves as Team Burlington: Honourable Karina Gould, Oakville North-Burlington MP Pam Damoff and Burlington MPP Eleanor McMahon.
The funding “will ensure our planning efforts result in a modern and integrated transportation system that improves accessibility and strengthens our communities.”
McMahon added that improving transit and transportation options for commuters and families is an important part of the work our government is doing to create opportunity and make life more affordable for people.
That plan includes our ongoing commitment to invest in a well-designed regional transportation system that connects people to their families, schools and jobs.
No word on just when the rolling stock will arrive.
MetroLinx is preparing for 15 minute service on the Lakeshore lines.
 South side of the Burlington GO station where 10 bays have been created for bus traffic to roll in
 By Lisa Kearns
April 24th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
This delegation sets out my position on item PB 33-18 – Community Benefits 421-431 Brant St. as Jim Young has delegated on behalf of ECoB this evening.
 Aaron A. Moore, Phd and expert on urban politics and public policy penned the IMFG Paper on Municipal Finance and Governance said the most common rationales used to invoke and justify the use of Section 37, more broadly know as density bonusing are:
• funding related infrastructure upgrades
• sharing the wealth created by development
• compensating those negatively affected by the development
In review of the 421 Brant St. Inc. report, there are few indirect infrastructure supporting benefits. With the longer vision of pedestrian-oriented flex street and the impending anchor mobility hub provisions the closest benefits are:
 • $150K in streetscape improvements coupled with $250K in setbacks/widened view corridors.
In my analysis, much of this can be takes as part of the 5% parkland dedication and the initiative to broaden the streetscape could have been reviewed by increasing Schedule O in the Draft Official Plan to widen Brant Street from Lakeshore Rd. to Caroline Ave greater than the current 18m in order to satisfy the Main Street function of: Table 1 Transportation Facilities. 2.4. Main Streets:
Serve the Downtown Urban Centre and the urban corridor that connects the Downtown Mobility Hub to the Burlington GO Mobility Hub;
Support mixed use places that contain a pedestrian-oriented public realm and street-oriented buildings;
Accommodate high levels of pedestrian and cycling activity and transit service, and moderate levels of vehicular traffic, typically within narrower rights of way;
Accommodate a moderate to high degree of people-moving capacity.
One way this could be interpreted is that the negotiators of this Report PB-33-18 have in part, bought benefits they didn’t necessarily have to and could have drafted the benefits the City finds favourable into the draft official plan, which this application is required to be in compliance of, when this was perhaps a missed opportunity, in part and adds up to nearly a quarter of the value of the total benefits.
Did we negotiate too specific and too early?
Not limited to direct funding for infrastructure upgrades, cost avoidance for future pressures on infrastructure can fall in this same category. This is where I will allocate the provision of green technology and sustainable architecture. At an indirect community benefit of $300K, LEED certification standards and/or compliance with the City’s Sustainable Building and Development Guidelines have been negotiated.
Appendix E in report PB-62-17 draws in the Burlington Sustainable Development Committee which has recognition under the current OP provides that “to the greatest extent possible, proposed development shall be consistent with the goals of sustainable development”. While the general concept of this building is acceptable, there is no evidence of stewardship initiatives in the plans to use LEED at a certified level although a willingness was verbally indicated. Why include this benefit at the application phase when it can be advantageous at the bonusing stage, perhaps the weight should have been greater in the public comments to prevent this crossroads.
Sharing the wealth created by development. There is no doubt that there is a financial consideration in a project this large, we know that from the Altus Group Economic Report and the uptick in development revenues in the City budget, not to mention the on going tax base increase. But just how much is the increased height really worth and how should this be spread out amongst the indirect parties. While not nearly enough to purchase even one unit in this property, $300K in cash is better than the single option negotiated in the 4853 Thomas Alton Blvd. report PB-16-16 which requires commitment from a housing provider to deliver affordable housing on a long term basis.
 Kearns wants Carriage Gate developer Nick Carnacelli to think in terms of the opportunity for the applicant to help drive value out of being in a position of power for the community. Where I do take exception is to the Applicants’s previous delegation in such an absolute statement that “the Region of Halton does not have an affordable housing plan and the City does not have a program”, that is not to say that this excuses or discounts the real need and concern for housing affordability. In fact this is where an opportunity for the applicant to help drive value out of being in a position of power for the community by spearheading inclusivity through the Section 37 provisions.
A hard look should be taken on if this was the best we could get. Going beyond shouldn’t be just going beyond height, it should be going beyond basic requirements and setting the foundation to create a demographic mix that contributes to our vibrant downtown.
Toronto Star columnist Andrew Keenan muses that the purpose of Section 37 in the Planning act is to offset the problems caused by changes to a neighbourhood when different kinds of developments are added to it, such as to compensate for increased traffic, population, or changes to the streetscape new developments bring. We would deduce that the bigger the problems, the bigger the benefits.
The list of problems with this application have been captured through online comments, delegations, written submissions, coffee shop talks, emails and a current of anxiety and unease through the community. One resident’s submission on May 15, 2017 summed it up concisely, her excerpt reads“…insufficient parking for residents, only 2 elevators, no parking for visitiors, no parking for commercial tenants, change to the individual shops along Brant with a design that is completely out of context visually with the neighbourhood, shadows and traffic…this proposal does not belong in this location”.
 What will the impact of the 421 Brant development be on city hall – not just the physical impact but the impact on the way the city is going to grow. Alas, the Section 37 Benefits – a hefty $400K in privately accessible visitor parking, a quarter of the benefits to keep visitors out of the already contentious parking needs of the downtown. This could be viewed as a benefit, however, does it address parking for the 900 square meters of retail space? At minimum the recommendation for retail store stand alone is 1.5 spaces per 100 GFA that’s a minimum of 13 spaces, but we have 8. The comparison is easy to make that other stand alone retail doesn’t offer on site parking, however, if we are afforded a chance to improve this at the foundational level, does 8 private spaces address the spaces lost with no net benefit?
This provision is meant to compensate residents for the real or perceived effects of development by providing for new amenities in the neighbourhood. Public art, a covered promenade, and the remaining benefits do little to offset the anger that has swelled in the community around this application. There are no open community amenities, no greenspace compensation for more trees, nothing. These negotiations do not even come close to anointing the damage the neighbourhood perceives and feels.
The delegation, deferred from the last meeting, was to ask Committee to simply afford the public the same opportunity that the applicant was given to have an opportunity to openly delegate and tell this committee if they have succeeded in negotiating Section 37 benefits that truly align with building an engaging city, good governance and community building.
We know our City could have done better to Grow Smart, not just Bold.
 Lisa Kerns is a downtown Burlington resident and an active member of ECoB – Engaged Citizens of Burlington. She is also a self admitted policy wonk – she digs and figures out just what much of the baffle-gab means.
By Pepper Parr
April 23rd, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
It was a Transit Forum that had people applauding and for the most part leaving the room satisfied that there were going to be changes made to the bus service in the city.
The public got their first chance to listen to the new Director of Transit, Sue Connor, who came to Burlington from Brampton where she turned that operation around. Transit users in Burlington are hoping she can do the same thing here.
Jim Young joined Director of Transit Sue Connor on a panel discussion Connor came across as a little on the humble side. She admitted that there are problems and she believes they can be fixed but the fixing is going to take time and she will need money from the city to make it all happen.
Which of course has been Burlington’s problem for the past decade – the city has not been willing to put money into transit – shaving and paving the roads is where the dollars have gone.
Bfast founder Doug Brown cautioned Connor not to get fixated on just the capital side – the buying of new buses and fancy technology – he wanted to see dollars going into operations.
Connor talked of transit as a business – Brown cautioned her on that too – transit is a service he said.
The 4th Annual Transit Forum was the largest ever held – the event had to take place at the Seniors’ Centre where a larger room was available.
There were a number of differences this year – the city manager sent his deputy but she didn’t say a word.
Other than Marianne Meed Ward there wasn’t a city Councillor in sight. The Mayor was reported to be out of the country and ward 3 Councillor John Taylor was on a vacation – in Amsterdam.
With that kind of council member attendance one can get a sense as to how big a task Sue Connors has ahead of her.
 Ward 3 city council candidate Rory Nisan on the right with community advocate Gary Scobie in the center The hope, perhaps, is that there were at least five people who have announced they are running for office in the October municipal election.
There were a number of school board trustees in the room: Leah Reynolds and Richelle Papin.
Some people thought a new transit plan was going to be announced – that didn’t happen but the audience certainly heard about the $45 million the province has showered on the city for transportation. Eleanor McMahon, Burlington’s MPP, who is also running for re-election, said that we are “entering a golden age for transit”
 Burlington MP Eleanor McMahon on the left in full campaign mode bending Penny Hersh’s ear during a break in the Bfast Forum. She added that communities on the Lakeshore East and West GO lines will be the first to get 15 minute service – no date though on just when that will happen.
Doug Brown pointed out that Burlington has already experienced a golden age for bus transit – in 1982 the city has 15 minute service on every bus route.
He said that 2012 was a disastrous year for transit – gas tax money that went to transit was reduced from 30% to 20% and half a million dollars was taken out of the transit budget. A transportation Master Plan at the time took another half a million out of the budget by cutting back on the number of routes and service frequency.
Up until very recently Burlington didn’t offer any transit service on both Christmas and New Years Day.
Connor is working on a new plan for transit and moving at least some of the service from the current radial approach to more of a grid system. She wants to create a five year plan – her challenge is going to be to get it funded.
 Transit and intensification are joined at the hip in Burlington. Citizens had wanted the city to prepare a 3D model of what the downtown core would look like once the high rise towers began to get built. City said they couldn’t create a model – so residents had students do something with LEGO. Former city planner and now Deputy City Manager Mary Lou Tanner looks over the model. She told the audience that there would be service changes in September and that her immediate focus is going to be on reliability – something the transit operation has not been able to do with the number of buses in the fleet and the number of operators on staff.
For the most part the audience had nothing but praise for the drivers – they always get a round of applause.
Some good news – Shoppers Drug Mart will become a part of the Presto card sales and refill operation.
The Downtown terminal will be open from 8-6 Monday to Friday and 9 to 6 on the weekends – and will no longer close at noon for lunch. There was a time when the then Director of Transit wanted to close the downtown terminals and have people hoof it over to city hall to buy bus tickets.
Connor told the audience that she has to first fix the foundation of the existing service and that she has a lot of work to do.
The audience learned that 80% of the transit traffic comes from half the routes
 Burlington Director of Transit Sue Connor. Connor told the audience that she wants to dialogue with the community – words like that haven’t been heard a Transit Forums before. Connors came across as a nice lady who wants to make a difference.
Connor expects to take a report to city council sometime in June – at that point the audience that liked what she was saying Saturday will know if she can walk the talk,
 By Pepper Parr
April 19th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
The Bfast 4th Annual Transit Forum takes place on Saturday at the Seniors Centre – get there early and you can take advantage of the free Continental Breakfast.
Bfast has been advocating for better transit for years – some of the people in the organization know more about the history of transit in Burlington better than anyone currently employed at the transit department.
They are closer to being listened to than they have in the past seven years. It has been a hard slog – the appointment of a fully qualified and respected transit executive has begun to make a difference. Sue Connor came to Burlington from Brampton where she grew that operation into one of the xxx
She will be part of a panel discussion and open for questions – this is the time for the public to let her know what they want and need and where the problems are – and there are a lot of them
The Vital Signs report produced by the Burlington Foundation highlights where some of the transit problems exist.
 A partial snapshot of how people who live in Burlington get around or get to work Bfast have a deep understanding of the transit business – they have been delegating to council for years and for the most part have not been listened to – to some degree due to the poor management leadership at Burlington Transit.
There is much better leadership in place now; the recently appointed Director of Transit is a recognized and respected professional.
 Sue Connor, Director of Transit. The problem Sue Connor will have is getting the funds she needs to upgrade both the transit assets and money for additional staff – and then some money to do some experimenting. Connor is probably part of the Burlington Leadership Team (City Manager James Ridge call it the BLT – not a sandwich). The challenge for her is to get some of the money the city has marked for infrastructure updates – there is a special tax levy dedicated to road repairs.
 This is the picture Sue Conner got when she asked – How are things going? It wasn’t pretty. Burlington is some distance from ever creating a special tax levy to bring the transit service up to the level the the planners keep telling the public is going to be needed as a critical part of the Grow Bold initiative that is going to put something in the order of an additional 1000 people in new homes each year between now and 2031.
The planners keep talking about the need to get people out of their cars and maybe onto bicycles and transit. Connor is surely saying to her colleagues on the BLT – Sure – provide me with the funds I need to do just that.
There may be agreement between the transit people and the planners on what is needed – getting it through this council is another matter entirely.
Saturday is the public’s chance to make their voices and their opinions heard – but ya gotta be there to be heard.
Salt with Pepper are the musings, observations, thoughts, reflections and opinions of the publisher of the Burlington Gazette.
By Pepper Parr
April 17th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Stephanie Mah was completing a Master of Planning in Urban Development at Ryerson University and chose a Ride for Free program that had been initiated by Oakville Transit in Oakvlle Ontario.
In her Masters Thesis she said the “research investigated the Ride for Free Public Transportation program for seniors in Oakville, to understand their travel behaviour and to understand their perspectives towards taking public transportation.
While 63% of seniors in Oakville said that the Ride for Free Transit Program did not impact their travel behaviour, 37% said that it increased their public transit use. The most popular reason for seniors to use public transportation was taking it by themselves.
Some interview respondents said that they used public transportation because they would not have to ask others for rides or they did not have access to a car. Seniors suggested that more education of how to use the bus and transfer could increase senior ridership. This research may aid other municipalities considering similar programs, which could help to sustain the independent mobility of seniors.
Jim Young who was a member of the Burlington Seniors Advisory Committee, a group that advises city council on matters related to seniors, took the Mah research and prepared a proposal that he then took before city council as a delegation.
He proposed putting seniors on the mostly empty buses on Monday’s as a major first step to improving life and health for seniors. “It will help the city to achieve its transit utilization goals at a cost that is much less than the revenue loss” said Young who argued that allowing seniors to ride the buses during off peak hours will have a positive effect on the economy and well-being of the entire city.
 Jim Young delegating to city council. In his delegation Young added: “Discussion of this topic tends to return to the issues of cost and why a program only seniors and Split Passes users in need. The cost to put seniors on off peak buses from 10.00 am to 3.00 pm is the loss of revenue from present seniors fare during those hours. It amounts to between $48,500.00 per year and $72,750.00 depending on the rate of uptake.
“This is less than the amount of one senior’s lifetime city tax contributions. It is 1/10th of 1% of all taxes paid annually by Burlington Seniors. It is ¾ of 1% of Burlington Transit operating budget.
The subsidy from federal and provincial gas taxes works out to approximately $0.69c per passenger journey for Burlington. In 2015 Burlington seniors made 191,000 journeys. If free transit for seniors caused a 50% increase in ridership the increase in gas tax funding would amount to $66,000.00 which means that the free transit plan for seniors could pay for itself if properly implemented and utilized.”
 Data from the Oakville 13 week Free Monday transit pilot program. In her thesis Mah reported that survey results suggest that most seniors drive to participate in day-to-day activities and only a small proportion take transit. The survey found that most seniors in Oakville relied on the automobile as their main mode of transportation with 43.5% of seniors stating that they used the car at least five times or more a week and 34.5% of seniors stating that they never used public transportation. The pattern is similar to what has been reported in other studies. A high percentage of seniors (67.8%) had access to a car as a driver, and 60.3% had access to a car as a passenger.
Oakville implemented a 13-week “Free Transit for Seniors” Pilot Program for seniors over 65 allowing for free travel at no cost on Mondays. The Pilot Program results reported that senior ridership increased by 578% or by 12,917 trips on the same Mondays in 2011 (shows the dramatic increase of senior trips over the course of 13 Mondays from 2007 to 2012 (Oakville Transit, 2012) highlighting the positive impact of free transportation on senior ridership.
Young wanted the city of Burlington to pilot the Free Monday concept. Council did not take up the idea. The debate over possible Free Monday transit took place at the same time Burlington prepared to spend more than $200,000 on a pilot project to add bike lanes on new street and reduce vehicle traffic to just two lanes.
The Road Diet pilot was as close to a municipal disaster as one could get – except for the cost of the Pier.
 Transit users at Breakout sessions at 3rd annual Transit Forum. Bfast is holding their 4th Annual Transit Forum at a time when transit is getting more attention, a little more money and now has a Director of Transit who brings real transit experience and a well-earned reputation for growing transit services to meet public needs.
Hopefully the Oakville experience and the change in attitude towards transit will give the Oakville idea and the Jim Young proposal a second listen.
Salt with Pepper are the musings, thoughts, reflections and opinions of the publisher of the Gazette
By Pepper Parr
April 16th, 2018
BURLINGTON, ON
Bfast, Burlington for Accessible, Sustainable Transit, is holding their fourth annual Transit Forum this Saturday, April 21st from 10:00 am to 12:30 at the Seniors’ Centre on New Street. Free continental breakfast for the early birds.
 Burlington’s new transit director Sue Connor, a woman with a real transit pedigree will outline her plan of action for repairing and improving the system when she speaks at the Fourth Annual Transit Users’ Forum Apr. 21.
Following her report, she’ll be part of a panel that will answer questions from the audience and discuss the issues that transit users raise. Panel members will be Jim Young and Glenda Th
Sue Connor was appointed to the job less than a year ago, but has already taken decisive action to make the system safer and more reliable. She helped to secure more than $1 million in new funding from City Council to hire more drivers, supervisors and mechanics to make Burlington Transit legally compliant and more reliable.
While the extra stopgap funding is welcome, Burlington Transit needs a greater commitment from City Council and a strong, sustained funding base, said Doug Brown, chair of Burlington for Accessible, Sustainable Transit (BFAST), one of more than a dozen community groups that support and sponsor the annual transit forum.
Sue Connor, recently appointed Director of Burlington Transit. “We’ve made progress over the past year and Sue Connor’s appointment is a sign of that,” Brown said. “But we need to do more in order to bring Burlington’s transit funding in line with the rest of the GTHA.”
Connor, Chair of the Canadian Urban Transit Association, is well known for her success in transforming Brampton’s transit system, which has posted ridership gains in the double digits over the past few years. Burlington’s ridership showed double-digit declines over the same period due to the underfunding of transit services by Council.
Sue Connor, who is described as open, honest, frank with a real concern with solving riders’ problems, will speak to the riders of Burlington Transit,” Brown said.
This year’s Transit Users’ Forum will also feature the third transit users’ report card. Last year, more than 100 users rated the system and this year’s Forum participants will also determine Burlington Transit’s marks.
Community organizations participating in the Forum include:
• BFAST (Burlington for Accessible, Sustainable Transit)
• Burlington Age-Friendly Council
• Halton Environmental Network
• Burlington Seniors’ Advisory Committee
• Engaged Citizens of Burlington
• Voices for Change Halton
• Community Development Halton
• Burlington Seniors Community Inc.
• Canadian Association of University Women, Burlington
• Burlington Green
• Poverty Free Halton
• North Burlington
The Forum is supported by the Burlington Gazette and Burlington Transit.
|
|
