By Carol Gottlob
September 29, 2014
BURLINGTON, ON
Each week, until the ballots are cast on October 27th, we are going to follow the tales and travails of a single candidate. We have chosen Carol Gottlob, running in ward 4 against a well entrenched incumbent. Gottlob has no experience in civic government, has never campaigned before. Following this candidate is not an endorsement; Gottlob will win on her own merit.
Zoning and intensification seem to be the buzz words to get citizens and developers fired up on both sides of the issue. Developers persistently remind us that Burlington has a provincial mandate to meet regarding intensification.
There is a growing Ontario population that needs options for places to live. We get that. The numbers: Current targets call for a minimum number of new housing units to be added to the built-up area between 2015 and 2031 as 8,300.
The intensification mandate also speaks to the intent of building responsibly vis a vis existing mature neighbourhoods, so it’s not a carte blanche to simply build out without thought to consequences of high density population, not to mention affordable housing. Consideration must be given to the impact a larger population would have on public transit, traffic and road infrastructure, and social services.
Two tower project proposed for Appleby Mall location – 16 and 11 storey structures.
That Official Plan is intended to protect, preserve and help Burlington grow responsibly. I believe one of the issue with our planning is the current zoning by-laws which are too large a zoning designation, too generalized a description and not sufficiently specific to reflect the needs of the prospective sub communities within current designated zones.
These by-laws are typically set as minimums that the developers are pushing and the reality is these minimums today do not accurately reflect these sub-communities’ neighbourhoods, their character, their streetscapes or setbacks. For this reason we are seeing a multitude of sub-communities within these ‘grand zones’ rise up against ‘Monster Home’ and ‘High Rise’ development.
When I am out talking to people I hear their stories and their fears: One example of such a conversation was relating to over building on lot sizes and the impact it has to the neighbourhood character. Potential requests for adjustment to by-law zones could be a change to the side lot setback- in other words how close to the property line a person could build.
Current bylaws stipulate no closer than 3 meters (9.8ft), but the request is to move a new dwelling to 2 meters (6ft). Seems minimal on face value, but when the houses in the immediate vicinity are actually on average 4.5 meters (15ft), the new home being so close to the existing property can be daunting.
The results become very drastic to privacy, notwithstanding the impact of precedence setting when bylaws are ‘excepted’. One can quickly appreciate what a Monster Home’s impact is to a neighbourhood adorned by smaller homes on larger treed lots. It also has long reaching implications of clear cutting in the absence of what one may feel are meaningful tree by-laws.
Clearly the citizens’ needs are not being met with generalized zoning minimums that don’t reflect their sub communities’ character, or their neighbourhood needs for responsible growth. I also don’t believe developers want to lose time and money investing with planners and representation and delays going to Committee of Adjustment hearings every time they want to build; it’s just bad business.
Indian Point underwent a character study that was abandoned. Roseland waiting for its study to be completed.
This past year council has been requested to participate in numerous neighbourhood character studies (Roseland, Indian Point, Shore Acres) in an effort to offset this imbalance in the current Official Plan and subsequent zoning bylaws. Citizens are screaming to address this with expedience but the process has been way too slow, without meaningful output for these neighbourhoods or the developers.
So the two parties continue to be at odds with the absence of reflective bylaws, and some developers leveraging the intensification needs as opportunities to build big, build out and, build often while they can. We need to do better for these communities. Until the rules by which all parties’ interests are best served and enforced with some sense of consistency, we will continue to see these disputes.
Burlington is also suffering a significant imbalance in its Citizen Tax Base. We are currently 75% residential and only 25% commercial. So while we are focused on building out residential to meet this provincial mandate, we are not keeping pace with the city’s need for commercial build out. We are hemorrhaging in our ability to meet the service needs of our community. Our transit services are failing with systemic issues that we are currently only addressing through route changes, or worse, route removals and no Transit Master Plan to resolve any of it. Our main thoroughfares are congested with traffic and getting around town is becoming more and more problematic.
Carol Gottlob, an English as a Second language teachers looked at the candidates that had nominated themselves in ward four and came to the conclusion she could do the job as well if not better than any of them – and she had no time for the incumbent. with no experience at city hall, no community experience she filed her papers and is now running hard against a 20 year member of council. Of such races are legends made.
I’m hearing you residents of ward 4, and I want you to know I’m ready to advocate for you. It’s time for change, time for an Official Plan that better reflects the needs of residents and still satisfies the provincial mandates; a plan to better address the Burlington of today as well as tomorrow, one that should be reflective of the attributes that continue to attract people to our city, and we should be wary of continuing to trade on these attributes for development projects.
We need a Transit Master Plan to address the growing population, the increase in traffic, and ensure we have a strategy to have sufficient support services. We have been developing our Residential Tax Base, but at what cost? Ignoring the rest of the things our city needs to support our growing Burlington?
On the cusp of our build out, one candidate in our ward is suggesting now we should “Build Up”, but how we move forward now matters more than ever if we are to preserve the values of our environment, our character, and our city’s culture. We need projects that make sense for our community, not just today, but long term.
Links:
And after 2031 where will the growing population go when the quota is met? Let me guess; more high density and overcrowding. Or, move outside of the red belt.