Council gets an earful about Official Plan
If citizens were unhappy before, it’s probably developers who are upset now
In 2006, the province identified 25 urban centres as Urban Growth Centres, downtown Burlington among them, in Places to Grow legislation. Provincial targets are for 200 people and/or jobs per hectare by 2031, which Burlington is already on track to meet.
The city has been working on a new Official Plan (OP) since 2012, but confusion reigns over what’s proposed.
Last week’s marathon sessions were on downtown policies, attended by about 150 Wednesday night, plus others at other afternoon and evening sessions. They generated 35 oral, plus many written submissions, after which the planning committee made several changes that should assuage some concern.
City staff says the current (2008) OP is out of date. Attempts were made to engage citizens over recent years. Not many got heavily involved, but several delegations said they’d attended at least some sessions.
Confusion
Changes and mapping are so confusing that agendas concerning the massive draft OP fail the test of clarity.
Today, downtown has nine “precincts,” but 11 are proposed and boundaries have been shifted. Lettersized maps of huge areas are virtually unreadable, making it difficult to know what’s proposed where.
The most controversial area is lower Brant Street, which generated much concern. The area just south of Fairview (the Upper Brant precinct, which allows up to 25 storeys) will be discussed further Feb. 6.
A citizens’ group formed, and asked the committee for OP deferral until after the October election. The committee voted 5-1 against Marianne Meed Ward’s deferral motion, and opposed several of her other proposals.
Major Issue
Approval of the 23-storey condo at the northeast corner of James, opposite our eight-storey City Hall, where 12 storeys are allowed, made the public realize this could be a harbinger, and change downtown dramatically. Up to 17 storeys could have been permitted under the proposed OP, but the city is allowing 23. A “special planning area” designation on the south corner could duplicate this. Meed Ward’s motion to delete that designation lost. Burlington’s tallest building is the Bridgewater, 22 storeys, under construction on Lakeshore.
Business reaction
Brian Dean and David Hayward of the Downtown BIA stated they’d held several meetings, with 24 “touch points” for members, but after the condo approval, members were very divided.
They requested deferral till April or May to try to get a consensus recommendation. They also requested inclusion of an innovation district policy. When Coun. Paul Sharman pressed them on their time request, and asked just what was needed, a frustrated Dean replied, “June.”
Other business delegations noted the shortage of downtown parking today, prior to a population influx. They pay a special tax levy, and the city is to ensure adequate parking. Homebuilder Albert Facenda wanted (and received) assurance that semis are allowed.
Citizen reaction
Many citizens requested deferral. There were superb presentations, but space does not allow detailing them. Major themes were height, the number of towers permitted, traffic increase, shortfall of condo parking, and policies from transportation and transit studies underway not included in the OP. Delegates argued that traffic-related issues couldn’t be addressed without that information.
They also asked about the status of the old OP versus the new.
A major concern was survival of downtown retailers. Most property on Brant has been assembled by developers, delegates noted, and retail leases are short-term. Lengthy construction periods for tall towers could force others out.
A common theme was: why bother with a new OP, when council ignores the present one?
Committee response
Members followed up on the oldversus-new OP question. Staff responded the new one was “informative, but not determinative.” That means they’d use new policies as a guideline where possible, but the old one is in force until a new one is approved by Halton Region.
A change moved by John Taylor removed the northeast corner of Lakeshore and Brant from the “Cannery” precinct (which allows 22 storeys), and moved it to the precinct along Brant. Staff had illustrated what it could look like.
All the Cannery precinct is south of Lakeshore, except for that land parcel, which didn’t make sense to councillors. The Brant one allows 17 storeys, similar to many nearby buildings.
Committee then approved the mayor’s motion. It allowed 12 storeys, with provision to go to 17. One extra storey would be granted per 150 square metres of office/employment floor space provided, or for every eight public parking spaces provided in an underground parking structure, to a maximum of 17.
Sharman moved that the distance between towers be increased from 25 to 30 metres. Staff was supportive, saying there is only a 15-metre space between the Bridgewater buildings, which is inadequate.
Sharman also questioned the maximum proposed size of a floor plate (area of a floor) at 750 square metres. That would remain from the draft, staff said, but noted that the 23-storey condo plan had changed to include a third elevator, necessitating an increase to 760 square metres on that project.
Meed Ward suggested requiring affordable units near Fairview on large projects. Staff agreed to report back, and she received support to allow extra density in exchange for preserving heritage buildings.
Changes endorsed: •
Change the northeast corner of Brant Street and Lakeshore, located in the Cannery precinct, to the Downtown Core precinct with conditions as listed above
• Increase minimum tower separation requirement for tall buildings within the Downtown Mobility Hub from 25m to 30m, which will create a greater feeling of openness around the buildings
• Include policies to allow additional density in developments that preserve heritage buildings based on the square footage preserved
• Include a policy encouraging consideration of private-public parking partnerships in the OP
• Prepare building guidelines for mid-rise buildings (six to 11 storeys)
• Place targets for two- to three-bedroom units in residential buildings to accommodate families with children
• Add the northwest corner of Burlington Avenue and Lakeshore to the special policy area matching the northeast corner
• Direct staff to work with the region to review the Downtown Urban Growth Centre boundaries, and consider restoring original boundaries with the exception of Spencer Smith Park
• Change the rezoning application requirement for a housing impact statement for more than 200 dwelling units and add a percentage target affecting mid- and highrise residential to achieve affordable, assisted, and special needs housing as defined in Halton Region’s Annual State of Housing report
Overall observations
Most presentations were sincere and heartfelt, and chair Rick Craven sometimes encountered problems curbing clapping and enthusiasm. Some delegate comments exceeded good taste, but many were excellent.
Disturbing, though, was a presentation by planning consultant Glenn Wellings, who in his zeal to support the new OP, referred repeatedly to the “self-interest” of many citizens presentations. He’s a pro, used to appearing before councils, but most citizens aren’t. That was uncalled-for.
Changes council made responded to some major concerns. If the citizens were unhappy before, it’s probably the development industry that’s upset now. If both groups are equally unhappy, council probably got it right.
Council approved these changes Monday. It plans to approve the OP April 4, but there will be another opportunity (a statutory public meeting) to hear from the public Feb. 27 and 28. For more information, check Burlington’s website.