in ,

ADI submits revised plans for Martha St: 26 storeys, more units, above ground parking removed

ADI revised
Revised rendering for 374 Martha

ADI has submitted revised plans for its proposed 26-storey building at 374 Martha, at the the corner of  Lakeshore. After purchasing 380 Martha next door, ADI asked for the opportunity to revise its proposed development to include the assembled parcel. Prior to the purchase, the proposal had wrapped around property, which contains a single, detached home.

City staff, council and the community did not support the original proposal, which started at 28 storeys then was revised to 26-storeys, considering it “over-development” of the site. ADI appealed the project to the Ontario Municipal Board. A hearing was to take place in March 2016, but ADI asked for an adjournment to revise plans following the purchase of the adjacent home. A new hearing will start in February 2017.

The full list of revisions for the enlarged site is as follows, and can be found in:

The original proposals (28- and 26-storey), June 2016 revisions, supporting documents and staff reports are available on the city web site dedicated to this project here: 374 Martha


  • elimination of the above-grade parking garage in favour of residential and amenity space
  • reduction in the height of the podium from five storeys to one- and three-storeys, above which a 23-storey tower would rise
  • total height of 26 storeys (88.4 m), inclusive of the podium; first proposal was 28 storeys, 87.86m, revised to 26 storeys before the adjournment; zoning bylaw allows 4 storeys
  • area of the development site increased from 1,359 square metres to 1,701 square metres
  • overall gross floor area increased from 15,089 square metres to 19,159 square metres (which is primarily the result of the substitution of the above grade parking with residential and amenity space uses)
  • floor space index has increased slightly from 11.9:1 FSI to 11.26:1 FSI; zoning bylaw allow floor area ratio of 4:1
  • residential units increased, and the mix changed: from a total unit count of 192 units in the original 26 storey proposal  (mix=145 one-bedroom units; 45 two-bedroom units; 2 three-bedroom units) to a total of 240 units in the revised 26-storey proposal (mix=4 studios, 162 one-bedroom /one-bedroom plus den, 74 two-bedroom/two-bedroom plus den) (Note: first proposal, of 28-storeys, had 226 units)
  • Indoor and outdoor amenity areas redesigned; first proposal (28-storeys) had 1,991 m2 of amenity space; June 2016 revised proposal has 3,258 m2 (Note: zoning bylaw requires 4,800 m2 amenity space)
  • amenity areas located on 2nd, 4th, and 20th storeys
  • parking increased commensurate with the increase in the number of units; now includes 241 parking spaces on 6 levels underground for 240 residential units; First proposal, of 28-storeys, had 218 spaces, 2 levels of above ground and 4 levels of underground. Zoning bylaw requires 300 spaces
  • ground floor retail space has increased from 327 square metres to 423.2 square metres.

A hearing on the revised proposal has been set for February 2017. ADI and the city are required to meet certain deadlines set by the Board in the ADI-procedural order-pl150274-Mar-31-2016, as follows:

  1. ADI formally amends application:  June 30, 2016
  2. Public notice of revised application: June 30, 2016
  3. Agency circulation of revised application: End of June 2016
  4. Staff review of revised application: mid – September 2016
  5. Public meeting (Non-statutory): mid-October 2016
  6. Council consideration of revised application: Late October 2016 (council meets Oct. 31)
  7. Revised issues list due: After council meeting
  8. Revised witness list due: After council meeting
  9. Prehearing Conference: 2-day prehearing conference, starts Oct. 27 2016
  10. Agreed statements of facts, matters in dispute and expert witnesses to be called: Dec. 12
  11. Witness statements due to Board: Dec. 19
  12. Participant statements due to the Board, copy to each of the parties: Jan. 23, 2017 (a number of residents are formal participants in the hearing)
  13. Reply witness statements/visual evidence due: Jan. 30, 2017
  14. Hearing: Scheduled for two weeks beginning Feb. 21, 2017 – March 6, 2016

Residents and businesses within 120m of the property received formal written notification of the resubmission and were asked to provide comments to city staff by Aug. 31 for inclusion in the staff recommendation report. Send comments to

There were 26 issues identified in the original issues list for the 28-storey proposal, dated Oct. 14, 2015. To read the list and see background on this file, visit previous article here:

What adjournment of OMB hearing on 374 Martha means, and My Take

A revised issues list, taking into account the revised June 2016 proposal, is due after council considers this file in October.

The process outlined above provides opportunity for city staff, the public and city council to review and comment on the revised application. The decision-maker on this development application remains the OMB. Staff’s position, and council’s position, along with public input, will be conveyed to the Board during hearing which begins Feb. 21, at City Hall.

My Take: The revisions address some of the concerns raised about the original proposal (for example, the above ground parking) but not all (for example, height). Staff will complete a full assessment of the revised proposal, which should be available for council and community review in the fall.

Written by Marianne Meed Ward

A Better Burlington began in 2006 after my neighbours said they felt left out of city decisions, learning about them only after they’d been made.

As journalist for 22 years, I thought “I can do something about that” and a website and newsletter were born. They’ve taken various forms and names over the years, but the intent remains: To let you know what’s happening at City Hall before decisions are made, so you can influence outcomes for A Better Burlington.

The best decisions are made when elected representatives tap the wisdom of our community members, and welcome many different perspectives.This site allows residents to comment and debate with each other; our Commenting Guidelines established in 2016 aim to keep debate respectful.

Got an idea or comment you want to share privately? Please, get in touch:


Leave a Reply
  1. the continuation of even discussing this proposal is ridiculous. This challenge if supported and continued will entice other developers (maybe they already have) to also challenge high high rises downtown.
    Stick to the plan! there should be no wavering even if ADI is a major developer in this city. AND for that reason ADI should be more sensible in respecting the official planning of the City of Burlington and the governing councilors.
    With the strong organized governing body of Burlington, these challenges must be met head on and thwarted as they are presented.

  2. This bldg. will be too high even at 26 stories. I regret and do not understand why the vote was 6 to 1 in favour of the OMB. Thank you for trying, it should be disolved. The Municipality should have the final say in what is built where we live, not the OMB. The traffic on Lakeshore is already choked, with two new high rises coming in the same area, it will be impossilbe. I live in Harbor Lights at 12 stories.
    Soon, we will look like downtown Toronto, ugly, ugly and so close, they do not even get sunshine in their windows.

    You must be frustrated with city council many times. Mary

What's your take?

City provides $35k for eight community projects

City news: renew business license online; fire ban in parks