By Pepper Parr
October 5th, 2020
BURLINGTON, ON
The first of the Public presentations of a new development under the new rules took place last week.
The new rules require a developer to present their plans to the public and get feedback before taking their project to the Planning Department.
The rules are a little on the complex side and were the subject of some debate, which we cover in a separate article.
The presentation was done by the ADI Development Group and was focused on the second stage of their Station West development. The first stage is well underway – the developers said that there are already people moving in.
Something about that first phase – it is huge. Unless you drive north on Waterdown Road from Plains Road you might not see it. But drive north on Cooke or along Masonry Court and there it is – right in front of you. Cooke is extended right into the site of what amounts to six lengths of row housing.
The two structures are joined by a lobby area where the elevators are located. We weren’t able to determine just how many elevators there are.
This is the eastern boundary with the Aldershot GO station a short walk away. This is what intensification looks like.
Reasonably attractive, underground parking, basement units with a separate entrance – but it is still row housing with precious little in the way of grass.
The meeting was to talk about phase two which is projected to be four towers (but it could be three) with heights of between 18 and 39 storeys.
What strikes anyone looking at the development is – where is the parkland?
Architectural rendering of the the tower option for phase two of Station West.
Where is there any retail?
Those questions didn’t get answered during the hour and a quarter virtual presentation.
More on that in a separate article.
The presentation itself was not all that bad.
There were three people who could be described as public taking part. That was probably because there was very little in the way of public notice.
The Gazette did a short piece two days before – not much time for people to read up on the development and prepare their questions.
The meeting was to get public input on phase two – the first phase is a done deal.
The developer was offering two versions: one with three towers, a second with four towers.
Four towers with some green space in the middle. Height will run from 18 to 39 storeys.
Three towers with small park space in one corner. One tower at 29 storeys two at 39 storeys.
The three tower option was made up of one 29 storey tower and two 39 storey towers.
The four tower option had buildings ranging from 39 storeys to 18 storeys.
There will be additional opportunities for public input. The truth is that there isn’t a community in place yet – there is no one to speak for the development and what it offers for those who see it as a place to live.
It is reasonably priced – said to be in the $700,000 range.
There are no homes in the immediate area that will be severely impacted by the high towers.
The development started when Rick Craven was Councillor for ward 1.
The land was reported to have been purchased from the Paletta interests for $14 million.
The ADI group has in the past built quality housing with some very innovative design.
Their Nautique in the downtown core is a smart looking 26 storey structure that has broken ground.
Getting to the point where they were able to start building meant breaking a lot of the rules; put another way – they were able to convince the then OMB that the little bus station on John Street was an MTSA – a transit area and that justified the height they were asking for.
The ADI’s are tough, very in your face developers. They don’t take prisoners – but they are in the process of creating a community that lacks severely in the way of amenities.
All MPP McKenna did was suggest that maybe her government might possibly do something. As if she has any influence in her government. Meantime her government has been beavering away removing the few remaining constraints on developers ambitions.
How many units in total from these monstrosities? Stage one was 172 units. Seven hundred thousand for what square footage? Did anyone say? If so, why not report that here? If not, why?
Once again, as is usual in Burlington, the pedestrian realm is an afterthought for the existing development, with poles right in the sidewalk. If we expect to see more people walking, we have to do a hundred times better, not to mention having useful retail in walking distance.
Intensification does not have to look like this at all. While the second photo shows the back side of the units and the sound barrier for the tracks, it looks as if that will be the main view the public gets from outside the development. It couldn’t look more slummy and banal if they tried. ADI’s developments elsewhere in the city (LINK, Burlington Lofts) present a much better appearance to their neighbours than this does. Very surprised the design review board let this slip by.
And what’s with the transparent “trees” in the architectural rendering for the new buildings? Is that supposed to represent imaginary trees that the developer won’t be planting?
ADI did not “convince the OMB that the little bus station on John Street was an MTSA” – that was the Council Official Plan position that ADI used to get what they wanted. Would we have the same if Council had not deemed the little bus station an MTSA is not a question that can be answered. The position taken by many community advocates and the groups that represent them is despite 2018 election promises we got too little too late from Council in terms of removing the MTSA as soon as it was recognized that a little bus station being called an MTSA in the OP was not producing what the public wanted in the downtown. That being said we have not heard the same complaints about the Aldershot MTSA but that just may be because they are not as well organized as the downtown groups. You can blame the developers all you want it does not change the fact that the downtown MTSA was a bad Council decision for the OP that developers have been able to capitalize on despite MPP McKenna’s clear position after election in 2018 that her government would allow it to be removed and the UGC moved. Whether ignorance or chasing government monies played a part in the original decision or not Council has taken its sweet time in doing what they should have started in very early 2019 not late 2020 and that is an indisputable fact.