Archive for May, 2011
How we can meet our growth targets without overintensification?
I’m frequently asked by residents: how can city staff and other councillors support projects that are clearly out of line with the Official Plan, and aren’t supported by residents?
There are several of the arguments given, but I don’t think they hold water.
Residents understand we must meet growth targets and that we can do so without overintensification. Residents understand that our targets can be met with jobs or housing, and are asking for a greater focus on meeting our targets through jobs. Residents understand that its important to protect rural greenspace, but that it’s equally important to protect our urban greenspace. Residents understand that the Official Plan allows for changes, and expect these changes to be modest and well-justified and that major changes will occur through the Official Plan review.
Why the cycling races left Burlington
Vote on city’s contribution May 24, 7pm, City Hall
The Canadian National Cycling Championship races slated for Burlington in June and July – including the prestigious “criterium” race through downtown Burlington July 1 – have been pulled by the organizer.
The criterium will be held in Toronto. Two other races will be held in Belfountain. Of the remaining two races, only one is fully in Burlington, running through Aldershot along Snake/York/Plains/Waterdown roads. The other cuts through Milton, by Rattlesnake Point.
The organizer cited the high cost of policing for moving the races. These costs, however, have been known for months. In addition, last summer the city pledged $30,000 for each of two years, and the Burlington Hotel Association pledged $20,000 each of two years to hold the races here, which would have contributed significantly toward paying policing costs.
After the races were pulled, both the the city and the hotel association reduced their funding to $10,000 each.
Everyone at City Hall wanted this event to be successful, and didn’t want to pull the plug too soon, even though the writing seemed to be on the wall months ago that this wasn’t meant to be. That’s not through a lack of effort on the city’s part.
My take: It’s a shame that the races won’t be held here, but it’s better to take a pass than risk an event cobbled together at the last minute when public safety is involved. I do not support providing any funding for this event, given most of it will be held outside Burlington, and the remaining races are not the commitment the organizer made to us to get the initial funding. Further, there are many other worthy sporting events held in Burlington that get no city money.
What do you think? Should the city contribute to this project? Click below to leave a comment.
Residents say “no thanks” to community “benefits”
In exchange for approving the Molinaro building at Brock/Elgin at double the height and density allowed in the Official Plan, $500,000 in “community benefits” were negotiated. These talks took place behind closed doors in discussions with the developer and city staff with no community input, nor was I invited to attend on your behalf.
My Take: I’m concerned about the use of community benefits to negotiate extra height and density, and that’s why I’m bringing a motion to reexamine this practise as part of our Official Plan review in 2012. Burlington is one of only four municipalities in Ontario that use community benefits, and it’s fraught with complications. I believe the Official Plan should be respected with only minor variations allowed. Our plan is reviewed every five years – ample opportunity to make more significant changes that may be needed.
What do you think? Do you support the use of community benefits to allow increased height and density? Leave your comment or email me at
Brock & Elgin highrise approved at double height/density
Final vote May 24, 7pm, Council Chambers
A 14-storey highrise at the corner of Brock and Elgin streets that is double the height and density permitted in the Official Plan has been approved, over the objections of dozens of residents, by a 6-1 vote (I was the dissenting vote). The approval comes to a final vote at council May 24.
Dozens of residents objected at three public meetings held on this project. Further, the owner of the adjacent property at Brock and Elgin opposed the project saying the scale will orphan his property for reasonable development.
Adding this apartment on this site will create a create a forest of highrises with nary a blade of grass in site. The picture to the right says it all – and it doesn’t even include the remaining parcels which could be similarly developed.
To add insult to injury, this project will be registered as a condo, but only offered as rental suites – a significant tax dodge since condos pay less property taxes than rental units.
My take: This is another example of a missed opportunity for balanced intensification in the downtown, one that respects the vision for growth articulated in the Official Plan. It is overintensification that ignores community input, creates a forest of highrises on a single block and provides no private greenspace for the residents who will move in. A seven storey building would have achieved intensification goals – this goes well beyond what is necessary here.
Please check out the articles covering issues that you've told me matter to you. I value your feedback on them because it informs the decisions I make. If you want to let me or others know about concerns or events in your neighbourhood, please get in touch.