Save our Waterfront | Burlington

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.

Continue reading →

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.

I was at the city council meeting last night to formally delegate, asking councillors not to pass the guidelines, and more importantly to begin a process to truly engage the community in a city-wide discussion about what our vision is for the waterfront. Three other residents also spoke against the guidelines, to no avail.

I presented our Save Our Waterfront petition asking council not to put towers on the waterfront, signed by 55 people from across the city in a 24-hour period. An additional 12 people wrote comments on this website opposing towers on the waterfront. Many others privately emailed me comments. Most of you had no idea this was in the works.

The city defended its process, saying it had gone “above and beyond” the legal requirements of public notification. Which begs the question – then why do so many of us not know, until now, that this is happening? The implication here is clear – if the city’s process is fine (which it isn’t) you are to blame for not knowing.

Only one councillor, John Taylor, acknowledged the city’s communication problem. “We still have a ways to go to improve communication,” he said last night. “I believe we could do more to communicate the changes that are coming.” He suggested devoting an issue of City Talk to downtown development, the Old Lakeshore Road precinct and a primer on Places to Grow, the legislation mandating intensification downtown.

I’ve written to thank him for his suggestions, and to offer my services to help.

Meanwhile, downtown councillor Peter Thoem said to those of us who delegated that our “alarmist fears are ill-founded,” and further said the city is “on the right track” with plans to develop the downtown.

Councillor Rick Craven said the downtown has been discussed “a dozen times” and the fact “the news media have just figured it out is an indictment of their process not our process.” (CHCH, the Post and the Spec covered last night’s meeting). Ergo, the media is to blame for not letting us know sooner.

Councillor Carol d’Amelio spoke about protecting the heritage properties (though the city has no formal plan to do so yet). Councillor Jack Dennison spoke about securing a footpath along the water, while acknowledging “we don’t totally control” what happens there. Councillor Rick Goldring said that height can be softened by street-level design. He also defended the city’s communication process.

What I didn’t hear anyone say is, “Yes, I am listening and I share your concerns about towers on the waterfront. Though many steps have already been taken that allow this to happen, I will investigate what can be done to change our course from now on, and to protect our waterfront.”

So that’s what I’m going to do. In the coming days and weeks, I will be talking to city staff, council, and others to determine what our options are going forward, what steps can be taken to set us on a new course to protect what Burlingtonians love about our city, and how to reverse the previous decisions which seem destined to destroy our waterfront.

Stay tuned for updates. You can subscribe to an RSS feed (top of the left sidebar) to get regular updates. You can also receive updates by following me on Facebook and Twitter.

This story isn’t over yet.

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

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.

On Monday, July 6, city council unanimously passed design guidelines for the Old Lakeshore Road precinct. The guidelines essentially deal with streetscape and building design for the area, should the development proceed.

But the options in the official plan are a best case scenario. The 8-storey limit is already being appealed by one developer, and recent experience in Burlington has shown that “maximum” heights quickly become “minimum” heights when a developer wants more.

Even worse, council has already approved the Mayrose-Tycon development across the street from the Old Lakeshore Road precinct, on the lake side, which will allow a 22-storey tower and two 7-storey towers.

When that application was being considered, the proposal was to “concentrate urban development between Brant Street and Martha Street.” Development will push several streets past that if the Old Lakeshore Road precinct is developed according to the current official plan.

The end result will be a wall of towers along the water.

Many residents are unaware that this is coming. Those of us who have voiced our concerns are told:

1- the official plan allows for the heights already

2- we’ve got to intensify the area to meet growth targets in the provincial Places to Grow legislation

There are two problems with this thinking. If developers can seek official plan amendments to go “higher” than allowed, can’t residents seek amendments to go lower? We need to rethink our “plan.” Besides, just because we’ve already taken one step in the wrong direction, doesn’t mean we need to compound the error by taking another step in the wrong direction.

Second, there’s been no city-wide discussion about where the “intensification” to meet Places to Grow should occur. If you surveyed the city, it’s unlikely the majority of residents would say “Yes! Let’s put towers along our waterfront, blocking views and access to everyone but those who can afford to live there!” I would expect quite the opposite.

We’ve got to let the city know we don’t want towers on the lake, and we don’t want to compound the mistakes of this and previous councils by taking another step in the wrong direction.

So write a comment below or join the campaign to Save our Waterfront. Click herel

Let’s bring strength in numbers!