Click to enlarge

The post appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

Burlington’s Development and Infrastructure Committee met on March 25 and approved a rezoning which will pave the way for a large and concentrated townhouse development on Ghent Avenue in Ward 2. Councillor Meed Ward cast the lone dissenting vote. She writes:

I am increasingly concerned about the pitting of Burlington’s urban communities against rural communities in discussions on intensification.

I am increasingly concerned about the pitting of urban communities against rural communities in discussions on intensification. We hear that we must allow the maximum intensification in the urban area “in order to protect the rural area.” We hear that we must sacrifice greenspace in urban settings to preserve greenspace in rural settings.

The job of protecting the rural area from residential and commercial development has already been done on our behalf by decree from the province, under the Places to Grow Act. We can’t take the credit for that, nor is that within our control. The rural area is protected, period.

Our job, and what city council and staff do control, is how we will intensify the urban area in response. The “how” is very important. Not all developments are created equal; some are good, others not so. Council has control over the how and the what of development in the urban area.

Provincial, regional and municipal planning documents are used to support intensification in the urban area. However, every single one of these documents states that intensification must “respect the character of existing communities.” Character is defined, among other things, by lot sizes, vegetation, architectural styles, types and sizes of homes, setbacks from the street.

The recent development that was approved for Ghent Ave introduced new types and sizes of homes (back to back townhomes), closer to the street, on much smaller lot sizes (greenspace on previous lots was 72%; greenspace in the new development will be about half that at 38%). There will be a net loss of 40 trees, plus four city street trees. There is no question the development is not in keeping with the character of the existing neighbourhood. A development of half or even two thirds of the size, using semi-detached and townhomes, with greater setbacks, would have preserved character and greenspace and met our obligations to intensify. The Official Plan here permits a range of density from 26-50 units/ha – this development went for the maximum, and character and urban greenspace are sacrificed as a result.

The job of protecting Burlington’s rural area has already been protected from residential and commercial done on our behalf by decree from the province, under the Places to Grow Act.

To use any of the provincial, regional or municipal planning documents to justify denuding and paving over the urban area in the name of intensification is an abuse of these policies. Out of fear of this development being appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (and potentially granted), council does the work of the OMB for it, and turns us into handmaidens of the development industry.

The people who move into these intensified developments want trees, greenspace and breathing room, too, and we owe it to them as part of our responsibility for good planning. We should not be taking credit for protecting the rural area (the province has done that for us). We should not be giving up control of what we can actually decide, and that is ensuring that intensification respect the character of existing communities.

We’ve got a long way to go.

Marianne Meed Ward, Ward 2 Councillor

Google maps tells the story – approval of the development means the end of the largest stand of trees in Ward 2

The post No need to pit Burlington’s urban communities against the rural appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

This idea is a key driver behind the Burlington Community Engagement Charter – the notion that when we work together, and political decision-makers solicit involvement from residents – better decisions are made on behalf of the people we serve.

The Charter will be discussed at the Budget & Corporate Services committee of council March 26, 9:30am, City Hall, with a final vote at council April 8.

Some of the recommendations in the Charter include:

• using plain and clear language in public documents, and avoiding technical language and jargon

• informing residents how their input was considered and adopted or why it was not adopted

• treating residents in a way that is “respectful and welcoming” when they delegate (appear to speak) at committee or council

• ensuring early and widespread public notification on developments, policies, and city initiatives

The Charter notes that successful community engagement requires mutual respect of all participants, which is exemplified by listening to each other with an open mind; showing consideration and value for another person’s point of view; and valuing the role each person plays in engagement processes.

Special thanks to residents Steve Surya, Gloria Reid and John Searles, the city’s public involvement coordinator Christine Iamonaco, city staff, and all the residents who served on the charter team for their dedicated work to bring this forward.

My Take: I fully support the Charter as a commitment from the city, and with residents, to collaborate on decision-making. The city is making strides forward on clear language and early notification. We have some areas for improvement, particularly in respect , listening with an open mind, and ensuring delegations are treated with respect.

Too often I’ve heard residents dismissed as NIMBYs or Special Interest Groups when they try to engage council. At other times, council members have been argumentative with delegations, attempted to discredit or challenge residents rather than seeking to understand their views, or have used the question process to take shots at fellow colleagues.

Our aim must be to draw relevant information from delegations that will help us make better decisions. I’ll be looking for ways to up my game, and encourage all of us at City Hall to do so as part of our drive toward continuous improvement.

Your Take: How can I serve you better as your councilor, and help you be more involved in city decision-making? How can City Hall improve citizen engagement? Let me know by leaving a comment below or emailing me at Marianne.meedward@burlington.ca.

The post Upping our game on public input in decisions appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

The Sound of Music Festival

In response to requests from residents over the years, city staff will be reviewing the possibility of making all Burlington’s events and parks cigarette smoke-free areas.

Currently, Sound of Music, Canada Day and Ribfest offer voluntary designated smoking areas that are identified with signage that encourages visitors to smoke only in these areas. There is no enforcement.

Staff will conduct a review of municipalities that currently enforce smoke free events, and subject to the outcome of the review; it is the intention to have all events smoke free in 2014.

Staff will bring a separate report by the end of 2013 on smoke-free parks for consideration by council’s Community Services Committee. The process will include input from the Health Department and public.

Staff have reviewed the practises of other municipalities and provided some initial findings as part of their report on upcoming festivals and events this year.

• In 2012 Oakville approved a ban on smoking within nine metres of where children play including: playgrounds, play fields, splash pads, tennis courts,
basketball courts, outdoor pools, skateboard parks. The ban is enforced under the existing Parks By-law which makes it an offence to smoke in parks where No Smoking signage is posted. Staff from the town has advised that there are challenges with the enforcement of this By-law because of limited resources.

• Halton Hills and Milton have indicated that they are waiting for the province and the Health Department to take the lead on smoke-free parks and do not have plans to develop a By-law.

• At this time the Health Department does not plan on bringing forward a smoke-free parks by-law, however the Health Department will support municipalities in enacting a Smoke-Free Park By-law.

• In all cases, smoke-free events are supported by a Smoke-Free Park Bylaw.

My Take: I’m supportive of restricting smoking in parks, to ensure clean air for everyone and cut down on littering and the chance of small children picking up and ingesting discarded cigarette butts.

Your View: Do you support a smoking ban on city parks? Let me know with a comment below or email me at marianne.meedward@burlington.ca.

The post Should our festivals, events and city parks be smoke-free? appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

Encouraging residents to spend their cultural time and money in Burlington, and hiring a full-time staff resource devoted to culture are just some of the preliminary recommendations in the Cultural Action Plan for Burlington, prepared by CoBALT Connects.

A summary of their research over the past year, and some draft recommendations, are included in a report being considered by city council’s Community Services Committee March 27. Following discussion at committee, there will be additional public input and preparation of a final set of recommendations later this year.

Spending outside city

CoBALT’s research found that residents spent about $591 per capita per year ($103.8M annually) on cultural activities, which is $54 below the national average in 2006. Residents spent most of that money, and cultural time, outside Burlington. Only 32% of their cultural money and 37% of the cultural time is spent by Burlington residents in Burlington, preferring Hamilton and Toronto instead.

The opportunity for the community is to recapture some of this spending locally.

Residents like free activities at home

The top rated places for cultural activity in the city, as identified by residents, are (in order of priority): parks & open spaces, the waterfront, library system, community centres, boards (Performing Arts Centre, Burlington Arts Centre, Museums), and festivals.

The data suggests residents engage in “free or affordable activities at home, and more expensive ones elsewhere,” says CoBALT’s report. “This not only presents a problem for the local providers as they struggle to develop earned revenue streams, but also for the municipality as the go-to source for subsidizing activities focused on residents.”

Waterfront, downtown top cultural spots

The waterfront is a top draw

Collectively the waterfront was the highest prioritized space by residents from across the community. In addition, the downtown was recognized widely as the central hub of traditionally defined culture in Burlington. Some of the challenges to developing the downtown as a cultural hub include availability of affordable space for cultural engagement (i.e. store fronts, galleries), perceived lack of affordable parking, and the lack of connective elements to identify a cultural district (wayfinding, public art).

Many residents also felt that Village Square presented an incredible opportunity for cultural development if the property owners were amenable to the idea.

Healthy Creative Class

Burlington has a healthy presence of the “creative class” in terms of cultural organizations and people employed in creative industries, according to the CoBALT findings. About 3% of the population is engaged in cultural employment which is about the same as the national and provincial averages.

Burlington has 430 companies in the creative industry, including Marketing & Communications (76), Video & Audio Production (54), Graphic Design (50), Publishing (37), and Photography (33).

In addition, there are 33 Community Cultural Organizations, most focused on performing arts (theatre, dance, music) and historical activities.

The city is involved in delivering culture through direct delivery of programs at the Music Centre, Teen Tour Band, and Student Theatre; through partnerships with Drury Lane Theatre and Theatre Burlington; and through funding the Burlington Art Centre, Museums of Burlington, and the Performing Arts Centre.

The City’s only direct grants go to the Sound of Music and small requests to community delivered festival in partnership.

All told, these groups offer 89,000+ hours of cultural programming offered to all ages, $3.42M in earned revenue from ticket sales and paid experiences, and $729,000 in fundraising and in-kind support.

The city spends $3.5M, or about $20/person on culture, counting operating and capital funds for various organizations, as well as contributions to festivals, events and community programming.

Residents favour city $ for festivals, parks, community centres

In order of priority residents support municipal contributions to art via festivals and events (81%), parks (78%), community centres & programming (72%), libraries (69%); cultural facilities (67%), public art (58%), funding local non-profit groups (58%), and providing programs and services to foster cultural diversity (58%).

Some preliminary actions for City Hall to improve cultural activity in the city include:

• Designate at least one full-time Cultural Planner position within Parks & Recreation

• Determine a long-term approach to cultural management with either internal (city) or external leadership

• Invest $1 per capita in cultural leadership in 2014, growing to $2 per capita by 2017

• Develop a structure for small community grants for emerging culture to access signature facilities

• Create a Community Cultural Roundtable to prepare an implementation plan for the recommendations

• Publish an annual (or twice annual) Cultural Guide, similar to the Recreation Guide but strictly cultural offerings

• Create a Community Culture Fund via the Burlington Community Foundation to act as a central donations point for city-wide cultural activities

• Develop a community-wide governance training program and professional development fund for Boards of core organizations.

My Take: I believe municipal spending on culture should foster local cultural groups and activities, in the same way that our parks and recreation investments support local sports and leisure programming for local residents. I’m open to creating an arm’s length body to provide grants or other supports to local artists. A cultural roundtable and cultural guide are good ideas. I’m not sold on the internal staff position – we’ve got to determine first whether management of culture is internal (city lead) or external (community lead). I’d prefer the latter model, with participation and partnership from the city.

The post Residents spend cultural time & $ outside city appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

Some 100 trees and bushes on the property, and four city street trees, will need to be removed to accommodate the development

Planning staff are recommending approval of 58-townhouses by Branthaven on eight assembled properties on Ghent Ave. The 28 three-storey back-to-back and 30 two-storey standard townhomes will replace the existing eight single family homes.

The project is just under the density limits of 50 units/ha in the Official Plan. Townhouses (standard and back-to-back) are both permitted built forms under the Official Plan Residential-Medium Density designation on the properties. As such, no amendment to the Official Plan is required.

However, the project does require rezoning to allow townhouses. There is a variety of zoning on the eight properties. Some permit single family homes, semi-detached, duplexes, triplexes, or four-story retirement homes, and the most easterly ones permit only detached and semi-detached homes. Townhouses are not currently permitted.

Residents have raised a number of concerns, particularly about storm water runoff and ground water flooding in adjacent basements, the scale and density of the project, impacts on the character of the community, and removal of trees and greenspace to fit the development in.

Ground & Storm Water Concerns

Storm water will be collected onsite and directed to a holding tank that will drain into Rambo Creek. The tank capacity is 84 cubic metres, the size to handle a five year storm event. Residents wanted the tank to be built for a 100 year storm event, at 180 cm.

Branthaven’s stormwater plan was reviewed by a third party engineer (AMEC)hired by the city, who concluded that “reconsideration is required of the design of the stormwater management tank on the property.” Specifically they note that “the effectiveness of the storm water tank may be influenced by potential high water levels in the Rambo Creek due to high water events, and may flood basements of the townhouses immediately adjacent to the tank.” AMEC also added there is unlikely to be an increase of groundwater levels outside of the Branthaven property.

Additional information on water, wastewater and storm water management will be required at the site plan stage, if the rezoning is approved.

Loss of Greenspace

Some 100 trees and bushes on the property, and four city street trees, will need to be removed to accommodate the development. The city trees will be replaced by five trees of 100mm caliper, and 60 trees will be planted onsite. Branthaven will also contribute $1,425 for the city tree loss.

The applicant’s vegetation management plan focuses on preserving the existing mature trees, where possible, along the southerly property boundary.

Greenspace now covers 72% of the eight properties. Proposed greenspace under new project will be about half that: 38%. See stormwater management report here for calculations of lot coverage (via roads and buildings) and greenspace.

Impacts to the character of the community

A key concern in the community is the replacement of 8 single family homes, on large lots, with mature vegetation, with a built form (townhouses) that is not permitted in the zoning. Though the Official Plan sets the broad parameters for development, the zoning sets out the specifics of how that might be achieved, and they work together to guide development. Having strong zoning in place – and following it – is critical to retaining community character.

A recent case at the Ontario Municipal Board on Indian Point ruled in favour of a lot severance against the wishes of residents who argued the large lots were part of the character of the community. The board ruled that if that was the case, the city could preserve the lot character with the zoning.

City staff testified at the OMB hearing describing “the character of the neighbourhood as having lots of open space, a variety of architectural styles, large lots and mature vegetation. The character of the neighbourhood is defined by the streetscape, lot widths and frontages.” Given that description of character, the Branthaven project clearly changes the character of Ghent in this section, in replacing single family homes on “large lots and mature vegetation” and “lots of open space” with townhomes on relatively much smaller lots.

The city staff reports on the Ghent development note: “the development proposal introduces greater scale, massing and coverage than currently exists.”

The scale of the project seeks the maximum density; the Official Plan allows a range of density that would meet the medium density targets.

Reports

The full list of reports filed by applicant with this application can be found here.

The city staff report and accompanying documents can be found here (scroll to item #17). The reports will be considered by city councillors at the Development & Infrastructure Committee Mon. March 25, 6:30pm, at City Hall. A final vote will be April 8 at City Council.

Information on registering as a delegation to speak to this report is here.

My Take: The project is too dense for the site, and will compromise greenspace and the character of the community.

Community character:

Aiming for the maximum density in the Official Plan via the specific built form of townhouses – in violation of the current zoning – creates a lot of asphalt and sacrifices greenspace and community character. Under the Provincial Places to Grow Growth Plan – cited to defend the project – municipalities are directed to “identify the appropriate type and scale of development in intensification areas.” This project is neither appropriate “type” nor “scale”. Further, the Regional Official Plan and the city’s own Official Plan, both cited to support this project, call for “intensification that is complimentary to existing developed areas” and maintains neighbourhood character “in terms of scale, massing, height, siting, setbacks, coverage, parking and amenity area.” That’s not achieved here.

Though there are townhouse developments on the street, they are much smaller in scale and can blend into the community.

This project could be reduced almost by half and still respect the Official Plan and Zoning and meet the city’s obligations to encourage intensification.

A smaller townhouse development (without the back to back units, for example), or a semi-detached development could be compatible and fit into the neighbourhood. This project’s scale and scope overwhelms the street and thus does not meet the OP requirements to achieve compatibility with intensification.

I met with the developer and requested Branthaven consider semi-detached homes, or even removal of the back-to-back towns. I had also asked the city to consider taking parkland instead of cash-in-lieu for parkland, to increase the amount of greenspace. But city staff did not want to add a park to its inventory when Optimist Park is around the corner.

Stormwater

I’m also concerned about the storm water management on the site and the fact that not all the data is in before council is being asked to approve this. It would be better to wait till the information is in before granting approvals.

Your Take: Do you support this development, or would you prefer something on a smaller scale? Have the concerns raised by residents been addressed? Let me know your thoughts below or email me at marianne.meedward@burlington.ca.

The post Staff recommend approval of 58 towns on Ghent appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

Tax increases since 2001 – City 66.5%, overall 35% (when blended with regional/education taxes)

My Take: Ultimately, the size of the tax increase, the amount of nice-to-haves, the draws on reserves and small amount of efficiencies, led me to vote against this budget. The majority – 87% – of this year’s requests were approved, either as additions to the base budget or draws on reserves. We need to be more disciplined about saying no and focusing on need to haves, especially in light of the current economic climate.

Growth is at 1% (according to the Bank of Canada), many of our residents are on fixed incomes, and others have had either no wage increases or nominal ones. According to Statistics Canada data for Ontario, average weekly earnings increased 2% from Jan 2012 to Dec 2012.

Some residents are at the tipping point of what they can continue to pay, especially our seniors on fixed incomes who get no additional income increase in this same period. Property taxes don’t fluctuate based on ability to pay, so a 4.46% increase in this climate, on top of 35% historic tax increases, is a strain for many of our residents.

Your take: Leave a comment below or email your thoughts to me at Marianne.meedward@burlington.ca.

The post City taxes up 66.5% since 2001, overall increase of 36% appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

To take on this task, the BEDC was to have prepared new organizational structure and transition plan by February 2013. That will be delayed to June.

The BEDC board has already committed to amend BEDC’s operating model and business plan “to create a land development corporation.”

Read their memo to the Development & Infrastructure committee of city council here.

My Take: I’m concerned about the delay in refocusing the BEDC structure to meet the targets set by the city for economic development. We must keep driving the momentum forward. Yes, it is important to plan then act – ready, aim, fire, as the expression goes. But let’s ensure that doesn’t become “ready, ready, and more getting ready to get ready.” The restructuring plan includes a review of the mandate and objectives of the BEDC – those are already known, specifically increasing ICI tax revenue. It’s time now to focus on the best structure to make that happen. I’ve suggested in the past, for example, that the BEDC dispense with networking and fundraising luncheons and other activities to devote all activity to business attraction and retention, and suggested funding in this budget for an additional Business Development Officer. (That was not approved by council).

In terms of activities, becoming a land development corporation, might be an option, whereby the city purchases land to attract or control investment. But that’s probably more of a long term plan. There are quicker wins for development in the short term, by leveraging land we already own (especially in areas like the downtown), and making the case to prospective employers for locating in Burlington.

The post Ready, aim, let’s get going on jobs appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

Tax breaks, office attraction, supporting mid-rise developments to meet growth targets, partnering with developers to build parking, and bringing a farmer’s market downtown are just some of the recommendations from the Downtown Task Group to improve the vibrancy of the heart of the city.

The task group has been working for over a year to research options, engage the community and develop a set of recommendations for council’s consideration.

Members, which include the downtown Chamber, business association, economic development group, tourism, and two council representatives (myself included) developed 40 initiatives including:

• preparing an employment strategy for the downtown. The task group agrees that attracting employment uses is one of the critical factors for long-term health of downtown. The desire for more employment was also evident in public consultation. While the downtown continues to attract residential investment, research conducted by Deloitte and confirmed by urbanMetrics suggests that attracting office development to the downtown will require a concerted effort and incentives.

• examining municipal incentives to attract employment uses downtown, including grants, interest free loans, and tax increment financing (debt leveraged against future tax revenues from development). Additional tools include requiring an office component as part of future residential developments, and setting a target for jobs/population ratio (as suggested by the urbanMetrics study). UrbanMetrics found that the downtown will need an additional 190k square feet of commercial space by 2031.

• exploring a graduated tax rate structure for small retail properties to deal with rising tax assessments on smaller commercial properties.

• taking parkland instead of cash-in-lieu on developments downtown to ensure urban plazas and open spaces in areas of intensification.

• establishing a farmer’s market downtown and considering municipal start-up support and/or indoor space.

• affirming mid-rise developments as a way to reach intensification targets and set stringent criteria for redesignation to greater height; consider a policy to require open courtyards, and landscaped areas in new developments

• establishing a business recruitment program with targeted businesses.

• exploring options to include public parking as part of private developments.

A separate parking study has just been completed which recommends a range of options for council’s consideration, including extending meters from two to three hours, and free parking Saturdays and Christmas holidays. The Downtown Parking Committee and city staff will review the report and develop formal recommendations to council, with costing options, in the spring.

The recommended initiatives from the Downtown Task Group will be introduced at the Development & Infrastructure Committee Mon. March 25, 1pm, City Hall, and will also be the subject of discussion at an Council Workshop on the downtown Thurs. March 28, 1pm, Burlington Art Centre. The workshop is being led by the Canadian Urban Institute and is intended to engage Council in the discussion of the value of investing in downtowns, and determine Council’s openness to using policy and leveraging city assets to achieve strategic objectives for the downtown.

Following the workshop, staff will revise the existing Core Commitment document and prepare an implementation strategy for Council’s consideration at the May Development & Infrastructure Committee, with public consultation and final Council approval to follow.

To review all the studies and reports on the downtown, visit here, Items #8 & #9.

My Take: The recommendations include some bold steps forward to enhance the vibrancy and long-term health of the downtown, and I’m honoured to have worked with the members of the task group to bring them forward. I’ve long been an advocate for office development downtown, to bring feet on the street weekdays, year-round; this is supported both by the public input and the consultants’ research. I support mid-rise developments to achieve intensification and preserving pockets of greenspace throughout thee downtown – residents have been suggesting that for some time. Bringing a farmers market has been a top priority on my to-do list since I arrived at City Hall, and is regularly suggested by residents. Finally, it’s great to see some creative suggestions around easing parking downtown, and working with the private sector to add parking supply, while maintaining the traditional town vibe of the core. I look forward to additional public consultation on the recommendations.

Your Take: Do you support the recommendations? What are your priority items? Is there anything missing that we can consider? Leave a comment below or email your thoughts to me at Marianne.meedward@burlington.ca.

The post Tax breaks, office attraction among downtown recommendations appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.

Marianne Meed Ward, Ward 2 City and Regional Councillor – Burlington

The post Welcome to Ward 2 News appeared first on Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward.