Comments on: Towers on the lake? A train station in the park? We can do better

By: Kevin Ryan

Kevin Ryan — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:36:47 +0000

More on the Burlington Health Care Levy … otherwise known as the DOUBLE-PAY HEALTH CARE LEVY, since most citizens ALREADY PAY the Ontario Health Care Levy.

“City projections show that, for example, a home assessed at $300,000 could pay an additional $57.54 hospital tax levy each year for 10 years in order to fund the local $60-million contribution.

Ipsos Reid recently conducted a $21,000 telephone survey of 600 Burlington residents to gauge local response to enacting the special tax levy.”

By: kevin ryan

kevin ryan — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:00:42 +0000

Allow me to bring to your attention the all-new Cam Jackson city council download … otherwise known as the Burlington Health Care Levy … which council is proposing we will ALL pay, in addition to the Ontario Health Care Levy.

The entire council voted in favour of this new tax. All citizens should inform themselves of the details of this move, which is entirely without precedent across the province.

By: Marnie Mellish

Marnie Mellish — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:25:49 +0000

City Hall wants yet another group to be formed to ‘engage Burlington citizens…and to improve the support of citizen awareness’- the Civic Engagement Committee. If the same people hold the key positions in a number of city hall groups or committees, then, how is alternative change possible? How many more groups and how many more letters and petitions will it take before our voices are heard? The $9M spent on the unfinished Pier could have been used to purchase the Brock lands. Unfortunately the Burlington Post tells citizens how to vote and whom to vote for. Yes, the challenge now will be to get Burlington citizens to take part in the municipal election by learning about the issues,by forming positive solutions, by giving money, by giving time, and lastly, by taking the time to vote.

By: Peter Cummings

Peter Cummings — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:16:12 +0000

Do the city council not realize that the park that we are all in awe of also creates a great deal of revenue all year round? With the Sound of Music Festival, Ribfest, Jazz fest, etc. taking any more of the park away for “development” would threaten these festivals. Not to mention the city would no longer have that clean appeal that is has t so many people.

By: Barry Partington

Barry Partington — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:23:23 +0000

Unfortunately your notification of the meeting with the councillor arrived with very short notice and I along with I suspect a number of people could not re-arrange our schedules.
Perhaps this informaton should be passed along to the Councillor so that he does not have the mistaken impression that there is a lack of interest.

Barry Partington

By: Gary P

Gary P — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:25:51 +0000

If I had to speculate, I would say that the city is salivating for the high-rise condos in downtown Burlington for the tax revenues. Having little (to no) additional infrastructure costs to incur (and often they make the developers pay for trivial aesthetic improvements like pretty intersections and sidewalk features before granting approvals), the city stands to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars from these buildings. With penthouses valued at $1MM+, I think it’s a fair assumption that they want the cashflow!

By: Nancy Steadman

Nancy Steadman — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:23:59 +0000

I find the goals of Save our Waterfront laudable, but a bit short-sighted. You have only to walk through the downtown on a November day to see the direction and low angle of the sun. High waterfront buildings on EITHER side of Lakeshore Road and even as far north as Caroline, Victoria or Ghent would effectively block direct winter sun from residents/ shoppers/ workers in the downtown, except along the north south streets. Why not a graduated series of height guidelines moving back from the lake? More people could then enjoy the sun AND the view.

Of course, we’re dealing with a City Hall who used prime land near the lakefront to put up a parking garage so perhaps there’s no hope for common sense to prevail…………..

By: kenneth r colombo

kenneth r colombo — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:37:12 +0000

Our waterfront, including Spencer Smith Park, is a PUBLIC MEETING PLACE, much like a City Square. However, Spencer Smith is a place where we take our leisure, to relax, and enjoy its pastoral beauty and whatever amenities are offered.

Because it is a PUBLIC MEETING PLACE, all residents should have been afforded an opportunity to express their opinions in order to make it a better place FOR BOTH CURRENT AND FUTURE GENERATIONS.

I can recall NO BANNER HEADLINES in either THE POST or THE SPECTATOR, both of which are obliging newspapers, to the effect that all residents WERE ASKED to participate in the decision making process.

I find two very weak statements in Mr. Dennison’s communication of October 20-09.

“4. March 25 2009 general public meeting advertised in post, notice mailed to each landowner and also to each land owner within 120 metres.

5. April May 09 guidelines on city web site with public comments invited.”

There was no POINTER provided in either newspaper, making reference to the City website, “with public comments invited.”

I think council has not ‘met the test’ of engaging the public on behalf of the public interest. Heaven only knows what might have happened if the Save Our
Waterfront Committee had not taken up this issue.

To assure you of the veracity of what I say, I will clear the contents of my exchange with Councillor Dennison (to you) this morning.

In the meantime, I do hope you can press for a moratorium against prceeding further until the public has had an opportunity for further active and widespread discussions.

In particular, I would like to know WHY and HOW the current council has permitted its previously reasoned stance, in accordance the Official Plan, to be eroded to the current higly favoured position for developers.

By: Robert Eden

Robert Eden — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:51:09 +0000

During the election in 2010 we must tell all potential councillors they must put their thoughts in writing and promise to vote by these thoughts. Also we should ask the developers to stay out of OUR water front.

By: Rob Irish

Rob Irish — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:44:52 +0000

Perhaps our council should consider something even more visionary: a sustainable development model for the old lakeshore area. That’s what they’re working on with WaterfronToronto. Surely if they can do it there, we can make a more positive change here.