Waterfront advisory committee a go – with strings attached

December 19, 2009 – 12:01 pm

Save Our Waterfront got an early Christmas present, thanks to your many emails and phone calls to your elected representatives: agreement in principle to strike a Citizen’s Advisory Committee on the Waterfront. But it’s a present with significant strings attached.

You can read the details of the proposed committee below, developed after a series of meetings with two city councillors and two Save Our Waterfront representatives. We’ll need votes from two more councillors, but this is a step in the right direction. And, as always, we welcome your feedback (either provide a comment below or send us an email).

But a few days ago, we learned about the “strings” attached: when the councillors ran the proposed committee past the city’s lawyer, the advice was to delay its establishment until after a decision in the Ontario Municipal Board hearing on Tim Horton’s waterfront property. The councillors have elected to take this legal advice, and put the committee on hold.

You’ll know from our other posts that Tim Horton’s owns the vacant lot beside Emma’s Back Porch on Old Lakeshore Road and is challenging the city’s definition of a 10-storey building – they want to go higher.

We’ve been told the legal concern is that striking such an advisory committee on the waterfront could be seen as an admission that the city is uncomfortable with its own plans for the waterfront. The mere existence of the committee could be used against the city at the hearing.

That’s the argument, anyway. Save Our Waterfront, respectfully, disagrees. This turn of events represents an unnecessary – and potentially indefinite – delay in citizen consultation.

Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments (9)

Guest blog- Why disappearing school parkland affects you

December 8, 2009 – 9:07 pm

Today, we turn this space over to Ken Woodruff to talk about the potential loss of General Brock park in South Burlington. It’s a 14-acre parcel of land with 4 sports fields that could be paved over with housing if the city doesn’t act quickly.

The Halton District School Board, which owns the land, recently voted to sell it. The Save General Brock Parkland Committee, which Woodruff chairs, is asking the city to buy the park (worth about $9 million) to preserve greenspace and sports fields for our children.

City councillors vote at City Hall on Wed. Dec. 9, 6:30 pm on this issue – at the same time they’ll be voting on the Pan Am Games proposal to develop new sports fields.

Why spend millions for new fields when we’re about to close some?  These are your tax dollars. That’s one reason this issue concerns all of us. But there’s another reason: next time, it could be your local school – and its parkland – on the chopping block.

The city’s current policy is not to spend any money to save school parklands for residents.

That’s not good enough for General Brock, and the residents across the city who use its sports fields. And it won’t be good enough when it’s your local school closing.

Read Ken’s article to find out more.
Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in General Brock Park Battle, Parkland | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (1)

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

November 27, 2009 – 3:50 pm

A small turnout greeted the downtown councilor and city staff for a public meeting this week to discuss waterfront development and traffic issues. We know residents care about these issues – more than a 100 people have attended each of our last 2 meetings – so what gives?

Two thoughts come to mind. First, the meeting was poorly publicized at the last minute – a recurring theme at City Hall. Most of us only learned days before about the meeting, held Wed. Nov. 25, and a number of people heard about it from an email we circulated. Turnout would have been even lower without our efforts to spread the word. The city needs to do a better job.

City Talks, But Doesn’t Listen

Second, and this is more likely, residents have heard this song and dance before. These public meetings are mostly about residents listening to city officials defend their plans, rather than an opportunity for city officials to listen to the views of residents. The format is mostly question and answer – we ask, they answer – and there’s virtually no opportunity for dialogue and debate.

Wednesday evening was more of the same. We heard how Burlington is growing, that we need more people downtown, that the Old Lakeshore Road area of our waterfront is an eyesore waiting for redevelopment.

We get that. In fact, we even agree. This may come as a shock to our city council and staff, but it shouldn’t if they’ve been paying attention to the comments from our 2000 members across the city.

Save Our Waterfront’s goal, simply, is to achieve the right development in the right place.

Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments (16)

Towers on lake one step closer, but city prefers to shoot the messenger

October 15, 2009 – 12:53 pm

We’re one step closer to getting 10-storey buildings right along our shoreline, but instead of transparently presenting the facts about recent events and their own role in them, our elected representatives would prefer to shoot the messenger.

You’re being “misled”, our downtown councilor, Peter Thoem, recently told one of our supporters, when she contacted him to express her concerns, after watching our latest video (below) outlining Tim Hortons pursuit of a 10-storey building on the vacant waterfront lot beside Emma’s Back Porch.

It’s a classic, old-school political tactic – discredit the messenger to divert focus from one’s own actions, instead of dealing with the issues.

Our focus is to talk about the issues, and give you the facts. In brief, the facts are these:

* City council changed the zoning to increase height limits in the Old Lakeshore Road area of the waterfront;

* City council included Old Lakeshore Road in the urban growth centre boundaries, putting pressure on this area to meet population intensification targets;

* City council took a 20m minimum setback preventing development along the shoreline out of our bylaw.

What happened next was entirely predictable, given the enabling steps council took in this direction.

Now that the setback has been removed from the bylaw, Tim Hortons (TDL) is arguing with the city before the Ontario Municipal Board – not about whether they can build on the shoreline – but over how high 10 storeys is. Tim Hortons has also reserved the right to come after the city for legal fees related to getting the setback removed. A five-day hearing on that matter is scheduled for Oct. 26-30, 10 am – 4 pm daily, at City Hall.

Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (16)

City Council quietly removes shoreline protection

September 19, 2009 – 11:52 pm

City council has quietly removed firm shoreline protections along our waterfront – despite telling us for months afterward that a 20- to 30-metre setback applied, inside of which no development was possible.

Old Lakeshore Precinct waterfront setback - Conservation Halton

Waterfront setback in purple extends to the middle of Old Lakeshore Road. Taken from the city's Urban Design Guidelines for Old Lakeshore Road

Not so. All a developer needs to do is convince Conservation Halton that the shoreline can be stabilized, and there is no protection from Burlington to stop high-rises along the lake.

Tim Hortons appealing waterfront development limits

As you’d expect, Conservation Halton’s authority is now being challenged by a waterfront landowner. Tim Hortons (TDL Group), which owns the run-down vacant lot east of Emma’s, is appealing a host of issues to the Ontario Municipal Board in October. Those include the setback, height limit, and worst of all whether it is “appropriate to assume that the subject lands cannot be developed.” (click here to see Tim Hortons issues list).

If the OMB rules in Tim Hortons favour, the current zoning would permit a 15-storey building on that lot. Think about that the next time you order a double-double. Though OMB cases are site specific, you can be sure other developers will be looking at the outcome of this case as it applies to other waterfront property.

Planning meeting Sept. 28

Save Our Waterfront is applying for participant status at the OMB hearing. Meantime, we’re hosting a planning meeting Sept. 28, 7:30 pm at the Burlington Seniors’ Centre on New Street to tell you how we’re fighting this, and how you can help. You can read more about this issue below, and find links to our participant statement for the OMB hearing outlining our concerns, and relevant city, Conservation Halton and OMB documents on our media and resources page.

Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (27)

City’s waterfront info leaves you in the dark

August 26, 2009 – 9:22 am

I was recently talking to a neighbor about the city’s willingness to allow highrises in the Old Lakeshore Road area on our waterfront, which would take out almost all the heritage buildings.

“Why didn’t I know about this?!” she said.

It’s a comment we receive a lot at this website. But if you’re looking for answers, you won’t find many from the city. Thanks to you raising concerns and speaking out, the city has posted a “Vision for Old Lakeshore Road” on its website. The city also issued a press release on design guidelines for the area – a full month after council passed them – largely because you’ve made this an issue.

But the documents leave out key information about what council has approved for the area (read them on our ‘media and resources’ page).

Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (16)

“Extensive” waterfront consultation consists of 2 meetings + 62 people

August 4, 2009 – 4:23 pm

Those of us raising concerns about development on Old Lakeshore Road on our waterfront that would add highrises and take out heritage buildings, have been told the public was already “extensively consulted” – and that no consensus emerged.

Consultation went “above and beyond” what the Planning Act requires, we have been told, although the Act sets the bar so low it’s hard not to exceed it.

But I wanted to learn more about what the city had done to ask residents their vision for this area of our waterfront. So last week, I spent almost two hours with Downtown Coordinator Jody Wellings, and Downtown Planner Marianna Iglesias. Both were extremely helpful in answering my questions and providing background information. I greatly appreciate the time they spent.

What I discovered, though, was shocking. Not only is there a consensus to preserve heritage and not put up tall buildings, the “extensive” public consultation consisted of two meetings.
Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (9)

Council made waterfront mess – and must fix it

July 14, 2009 – 11:17 pm

Those of us protesting towers up to 15 storeys on our waterfront have been led to believe our city council’s hands are tied – those heights are already allowed in the Official Plan. We’re also told provincial Places to Grow legislation mandates “intensification” in urban growth centres, which includes the downtown.

So imagine my surprise when I learned that our current city councilors were the ones who passed the most recent Official Plan, and actually increased the allowed height of buildings in that area from 7 storeys to up to 15.

In 2008, our current council passed a revised Official Plan for the Old Lakeshore Road precinct on the waterfront. Under the old plan, the maximum height was 22 metres – 7-8 storeys. Under the new plan, described in the guidelines that many of us protested last week, the maximum heights increased to 10 storeys in the west section (6 in the east), with the option to go to 15 storeys (8 in the east).

That information came from Bruce Krushelnicki, the city’s director of planning, who spent almost two hours with me today (which I appreciate) giving me helpful background information.

The upshot:  this council can’t blame the Official Plan for tying their hands on saving our waterfront from towers, when this council passed that plan themselves.

Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (2)

Towers are your fault

July 7, 2009 – 12:47 pm

Apparently, the potential towers on the waterfront are your fault. That was the message coming through at last night’s city council meeting, where Burlington councillors unanimously voted to pass urban design guidelines for the Old Lakeshore Road precinct.

The guidelines are the final step in a long process that started years ago with the Official Plan and zoning bylaws which permit 6-15 storey towers along Old Lakeshore Road. Weren’t around then? Didn’t know this was happening? Your bad.

Councillors blamed the official plan, the zoning bylaws, previous councils, residents for not knowing more, and even the media for not covering this better – essentially everyone but themselves for the situation we now find ourselves in. Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments (8)

Save our waterfront

July 2, 2009 – 11:39 pm

Do you want Burlington’s waterfront turned into tower alley? If no, join the campaign to Save our Waterfront. Click herel

The city’s official plan allows for two development options in the Old Lakeshore Road precinct, between Pearl and Torrance: those options are  for 6-10 storey towers, or even worse, 8-15 storey towers. The area currently has 1-2 storey buildings, including 11 heritage properties  – all but one of which would be lost under the second option.

See the video for details.

Read More »

Email This Article Email This Article Print This Article Print This Article
By Marianne Meed Ward | Posted in Waterfront development | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments (29)