|
New BVRA presentations The
following was presented to the Town council on Oct 24th by the BVRA
regarding the Bronte Village – Heritage Resources Review Strategy: October 14, 2011
Your Worship Mayor Burton and Members of Oakville Town Council,
Re: Bronte Village Heritage Resources Review and Strategy
The Bronte Village Residents’
Association has been involved in Bronte-related municipal activities for the
past 10 years. The BVRA has been
particularly eager to participate in initiatives and events that help preserve
the ambience and character that Bronte retains and continues to offer.
Through the years, members of the BVRA have participated in
heritage preservation-related town hall charrettes, meetings, presentations and
development application reviews. Most,
if not all of these interventions can be summarized under common themes –
retain the historical charm of Bronte’s fishing village past, retain the
character of small town living and embrace the ‘sense of place’ that Bronte
offers our residents.
We are thrilled that the Heritage
Planning Department of Oakville Planning Services has prepared the “Bronte
Village – Heritage Resources Review and Strategy” Report and we heartily
endorse the Bronte Historical Society’s support of the report’s Objectives,
Conclusions and Recommendations.
We urge Council to approve the
report and the recommendations indicated in Section 6 of the report. Furthermore,
we look forward to participating in the recommended public information
meetings.
The strategies for preservation
should be enacted without delay and before more development applications are
received – applications which will continue to challenge Bronte’s unique
character. It is not an easy process,
and the proposed study is the first crucial step for the crafting of a strategy
and a framework from which to proceed.
We would respectfully suggest
that timelines be assigned to each recommendation/step so that Bronte residents
can look forward to when they may expect achievements for each step.
We look forward to working with
the Planning Department on this project.
On behalf of the BVRA,
Yours truly,
Laurie McGinn
President, Bronte Village
Residents’ Association
Bronte Village Residents' Association Delegation re:
Issues Report – Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval (Item #2)
&
Recommendation Report – Proposed Official Plan Amendments and
Zoning By-law Amendment (Item # 3)
Planning and Development Council Meeting, February 22, 2010
Thank you, and good evening Your Worship, Councillors, ladies and gentlemen.
My name is John McMullen. On behalf of the Bronte
Village Residents' Association, I am pleased to submit our comments
regarding items #2 & #3 on your agenda; namely, the Issues Report –
Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval, and the Recommendation
Report – Proposed Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By-law Amendment,
both of which relate to the Employment lands at Rebecca, Great Lakes
and Burloak and the so-called “teardrop.”
As you fully appreciate, the two items are
inextricably linked. The Draft Plan of Subdivision is contingent upon
OMB approval of the Proposed Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By-law
Amendment. Therefore, with your indulgence, I would first like to
address item #3, the Amendments.
I will start by commending Planning and Development
staff, and in particular Mr. David Capper, for the well-reasoned and
supported arguments contained in the Recommendation report. BVRA fully
and emphatically endorses staff's recommendation that the applicant's
proposed retail and commercial complex be refused. In the interest of
time, I will not belabour the many concerns raised by staff and in
previous community delegations by both the BVRA and others, including
traffic and pedestrian safety, increased vehicular traffic on Rebecca
Street, and site design and buffering of the adjacent residential area,
as well as considerations with respect to existing commercial
establishments and corresponding market demand and unwarranted
competition.
Every bit an issue, we submit, is the proposed
conversion of valuable employment lands to low-grade uses, a move -
were it to happen - that is not in keeping with the Town's intended
zoning of this land and Livable Oakville. The BVRA recommended against
this proposal in its letter of October 23, 2009. We pointed out at that
time that the proposed shopping centre would be an egregious waste of
employment lands – lands that could be put to far better use by
pursuing remunerative live/work opportunities that would benefit the
local community.
Again, we support staff's conclusions and their recommendation that the proposed amendments be refused.
Turning to Item #2, we have a number of comments and suggestions regarding the Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision.
We reiterate the recommendation, made earlier by the
BVRA and by others, that the stormwater management pond identified as
Block 4 on the Site Plan be relocated to the southern portion of Block
1, adjacent to Rebecca Street , and in the area of the proposed retail
complex. Residents on the south side of Rebecca and in the new
Lakeshore Woods development are concerned with any commercial
development immediately across the road and the ramifications this
would have. And rightfully so.
We suggest that maintaining the existing stand of
mature cedars and locating the SWMP in this area, and as an extension
of the protected woodlot in Block 3 that is proposed to be deeded to
the Town, would be a logical alternative. It would represent good
planning practices, providing an effective, natural buffer between
residential properties to the south of Rebecca and employment lands to
the north.
Furthermore, I would be remiss if I did not draw your
attention to the mature bur oaks that are to be found on this property,
on the east side of Burloak north of Rebecca, and the row of trees
running east-west through the middle of the property. We urge that the
Town ensures that the Applicant is fully aware of what constitutes
“Town trees” and requests the Applicant to preserve other trees as and
where possible in the site plan.
However, I again come back to the current Employment
designation of the lands in question. I do not need to remind you of
the relevant definitions and policy objectives contained in the Growth
Plan and Livable Oakville. That said, the BVRA respectfully urges that
the Town of Oakville adhere to its stated intent and use of these
lands. We endorse the objective to find suitable clients in the “Life
Sciences, Advanced Manufacturing, Professional and Financial Services”
and like businesses – and their corresponding high-knowledge employment
opportunities – as identified in Ms. Clohecy's memo of February 3 rd .
This brings to mind the recent announcement
concerning Solar Semiconductor's decision to locate in Oakville .
Working as I do in the green technology sector, I congratulate you on
this coup. And of course, we look forward to this business being
located in the Great Lakes Business Park .
However, Solar Semiconductor is but one example of
leading-edge organizations, whether they be in renewable energy,
biotechnology, life sciences or other growth sectors, that we should
strive to attract to Oakville, businesses that will offer high-value
employment opportunities to residents and likewise make optimum use of
what employment lands remain.
On behalf of the BVRA, thank you for the opportunity to offer our comments and recommendations this evening.
John McMullen
BVRA Board
February 22, 2010
January 11, 2009 Mayor Rob Burton
Town of Oakville
1225 Trafalgar Road
Oakville, Ontario
L6J 5A1
Your Worship Mayor Burton,
RE: Palm Place /Ashford Terrace
As you are aware, the development application for 3 eight storey
condo complexes on the former “Shell House” lands on the shores of Lake
Ontario in Bronte, was a highly controversial and publicly opposed
application which the community fought hard against. This
included an Ontario Municipal Board appeal – partnering with the Town,
Council and Halton Conservation Authority.
Our understanding is that the Ashford Terrace development has had
condos for sale within the provisions of the OMB approved site plan for
approximately 2 years. It is further our understanding that the
owner has stopped selling the condos ( Oakville Beaver, Dec.8, 2009 ) but it is unknown what the owner's future intentions are for the property.
The purpose of this letter is three-fold.
- To respectfully advise you that our Association remains
highly interested in the final outcome of this project and we hold the
same position we have for the past 7 years – the same position as:
- the former Town Planning Director, Mr. Peter Cheatley,
- our community members,
- the Halton Conservation Authority,
- the Royal Commission on Waterfront Regeneration,
- Mr. Martin Rendl, Planner;
- Mr. Frank Lewinberg, Town of Oakville Planning Expert; and
- Oakville Town Council.
Namely,
that the entire “Shell House Lands” property should remain undeveloped,
as parkland and designated as significant wildlife habitat for
migratory birds.
In light of the
owner's inability or unwillingness to move this project forward (for
whatever reason), we seek your leadership in determining if there is
any opportunity for the three levels of government to purchase the
property to fulfill its rightful best land use for future generations.
- Should
the land owner be seeking alternative site plan development in a
configuration that is other than what has been approved through the
OMB, we strongly suggest that no ‘deals' be made what-so-ever.
Any and all requests for variation to the current site plan must be
made available for public input and comment.
- We formally
request that any and all correspondence and discussion regarding any
change in site plan proposal, minor variance and/or possible zoning
amendment be brought to the attention of the Bronte Village Residents
Association in a timely manner.
As you know, Your Worship, information about the parkland dedication
related to this property greatly affected the outcome of the
development approval through the Ontario Municipal Board.
Information, the community was not aware of. We do not wish this
to happen again. The community fought to the bitter end on this
development proposal, but what was approved was a less-than-desirable
block of 8 storey condos on the waterfront. We know you are very
committed to community consultation and we hope there will no be
further alterations to the project that we are not made aware of and do
not have the opportunity to be consulted upon.
We would be pleased to meet with you or your planning staff to discuss this matter further.
Yours very truly,
A Brian Miller
Brian Miller
President
Bronte Village Residents' Association
c.c. Halton Conservation Authority
Presentation to Planning and Development Council Meeting
Monday November 9, 2009
Proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment
2441 Lakeshore Road West - Bronte Village Mall
Presentation on behalf of Bronte Village Residents' Association
John McMullen
Your Worship, Members of Planning and Development Council, Ladies and Gentlemen.
I am here tonight representing the Bronte Village Residents' Association. My name is John McMullen.
The BVRA is a grass-roots association of concerned Bronte residents.
The BVRA's mandate is to protect the village character of Bronte, to
promote community spirit, and to advocate for appropriate and
sustainable planning and development in Bronte.
We have been involved in many aspects of Bronte planning, frequently
providing comments, participating in consultations on development
applications, and conveying residents' opinion s on the planning
process. We have been involved in the development of the new Official
Plan and have promoted awareness of municipal level planning issues
among our members.
One such matter is the proposed redevelopment of the Bronte Village
Mall. We have followed the evolution of this proposal with great
interest for it serves to have a significant bearing upon the Village
and its residents.
At the outset, allow me to emphasize that we are not opposed to
development – or in this instance, redevelopment. A community cannot
and should not stand still. Redevelopment is inevitable, necessary, and
good - - provided it is carried out in a thoughtful manner that takes
into account the interests and opinions of all stakeholders, residents
included.
With that in mind, we wanted to apprise you of three initiatives
that the BVRA has undertaken with respect to the proposed redevelopment
of the Bronte Village Mall.
First, and based on earlier information sessions and considerable
deliberation by the Board, a set of well thought out questions that
address various aspects of the project have been drafted. I have copies
of these for your reference, and should time allow, I would be glad to
quickly read these.
Second, we have just now carried out a short survey of members,
asking them for their opinions about the project and certain issues
that had earlier been identified. I wish to emphasize that this survey
was carried out in recent days and, in part, in preparation for this
meeting and a later meeting I will describe shortly. Responses are
still coming in, and therefore we prefer to regard it as a work in
progress at this stage.
In brief, we asked whether individuals agreed or disagreed with
certain aspects of the proposal, such as the commercial viability of
proposed retail space, the overall mixed use development, the height of
the tower, configuration of condos on Sovereign Street , acceptability
of projected traffic, and other matters. We then asked if, overall,
they supported the proposed redevelopment, and to then explain their
yes or no answer. And finally we asked for any other comments the
respondent cared to offer.
At this stage, I propose to only touch on top line survey results.
More detail can be provided at a later date, once we have received all
responses and had time to properly analyze the findings.
The slight majority favour the overall concept of the proposed
redevelopment. Furthermore, roughly two-thirds agree with the
commercial viability of the proposed retail space, and with the
mixed-use concept. That said, 75% do not agree with the height of the
proposed signature tower, and nearly the same percentage are concerned
with projected traffic. With regard to the condos on Sovereign Street ,
opinions are split 50/50.
The third initiative that I wished to advise you of is a planned
meeting, hosted by the BVRA, for our members and others, and with the
developer. We will submit the previously mentioned set of questions to
the developer and ask that they respond to these. We wish to point out
that the developer has agreed to this meeting. The date and location,
however, has as yet to be decided.
In closing, we wish to reiterate that the BVRA and its members are
not opposed to development, or in this case specifically, to
redevelopment of the Mall per se. Once again, our mandate – and the
interests of residents – is to protect the village character of Bronte,
to promote community spirit, to advocate for appropriate and
sustainable planning and development, and to advocate for municipal
planning and development policies that support the interests of our
membership.
And again, it is our objective and desire – as we are sure it is
yours - to ensure that redevelopment such as proposed is carried out in
a careful and thoughtful manner, one that allows for consultation with
concerned stakeholders and that affords the opportunity for input and
addressing concerns constructively. The end product will be all the
better for this collaborative approach.
Thank you.
The following letter was sent to the town with the BVRAs concerns
regarding the proposed development at the corner of Burloak and Rebecca
Streets .
Mr. David Capper
Senior Planner
Town of Oakville
Oakville , ON
23 October 2009
Dear Mr. Capper:
File # 24T-09002/1635
On behalf of the Board of the Bronte Village Residents' Association,
I am pleased to submit our comments regarding the above application for
your consideration. These comments were approved at our Board meeting
of October 23. As is our custom, the comments will be posted to our
website with a request to our membership to provide any dissenting or
additional comments back to the Board with a copy to you – or vice
versa, at their discretion.
Our comments are as follows:
- The original intent of the Secondary Plan was to secure
this land for high-grade employment enterprises, capable of generating
salaries that would allow the employees to live in Oakville as well as
to work here. We are therefore strongly opposed to yet another shopping
centre on Block 1, on the grounds that it represents a conversion from
the intended employment zoning, and thus a low-grade use of this
valuable employment land which thereby does not support a “ Livable
Oakville ”.
- We would further point out that the local
residential neighbourhood is already ringed with several large and
comprehensive shopping centres, both in Bronte and in Burlington , as
well as smaller, neighbourhood commercial centres. It is our opinion
that neighbouring Bronte and Burlington residents have no substantive
shopping needs which are unmet by currently available, convenient
facilities.
- We note that the shopping centre plan
includes a waste storage facility backing on to Rebecca. With existing
residential properties located directly across the road from this
location, and bearing in mind that ICI garbage collections are
typically made late-night or early-morning, and the associated racket
of clanging steel and back-up beepers, we find this positioning
particularly thoughtless. Whatever uses are finally approved for this
property, Site Planning must ensure that garbage handling and truck
deliveries are kept as distant from existing residential areas as
physically possible.
- Whatever development is finally
approved, we would recommend that the Applicant be requested to
relocate the SWMP facility (Block 3) to the southerly perimeter of the
property. We submit this shift will represent good planning practices,
in that it will provide a worthwhile, natural separation between the
residential properties on the south side of Rebecca, and the employment
lands to the north. In support of this recommendation, we would point
out that the Regional Water Treatment Plant on the east side of Great
Lakes Blvd. currently provides an excellent, naturalized (substantial
berms and well treed) separation between the residential areas to the
south and the employment lands to the north.
- A healthy
planting of mature cedars currently exists along the north side of
Rebecca. We ask that the Applicant be encouraged to preserve and
incorporate this hedgerow as part of the SWMP block relocated as
described above.
- Whatever the final development, we
question the advisability of providing direct access from this block to
Rebecca. The latter is already an extremely busy thoroughfare,
particularly during morning and evening rush hours, and there is still
considerable new residential density yet to be completed both in
Lakeshore Woods and the three towers of Palm Place . The contemplated
re-vitalization of the Bronte Mall is also anticipated to greatly
exacerbate the current rush-hour congestion at the intersection of
Rebecca and Bronte Road . We recommend that access points to the
subject property be limited to Burloak Drive and to Great Lakes.
- A
row of mature bur oaks have graced the east side of Burloak Drive,
north of Rebecca for many years. It would appear that the majority of
these trees are sufficiently close to the right-of-way to be classified
as “Town trees”. In deference to the name of the adjacent road (
Burloak Drive ), we submit that all these plantings be preserved as
“Town trees”, with additional plantings undertaken where necessary to
close gaps.
- Likewise, a row of some six, mature bur oaks
extends in an east-west direction across the property. We request that
the Applicant be encouraged to preserve these trees as and where
possible as part of the site plan development.
We thank you for this opportunity to comment on this
application, and would be most obliged if you would ensure that the
Bronte Village Residents Association is included on the official
notification list for any future public meetings regarding the
development of this property.
Further, by copy of this letter to His Worship Mayor Burton and
Councillors Johnston and Robinson, we wish to register our sincere
disappointment regarding the apparent lack of any over-all economic
strategy for the development of these valuable employment lands.
Firstly, as noted above, we are strongly opposed to the conversion of
the subject property from employment to retail. Secondly – and of even
greater concern - we are now starting to see piece-meal development of
the valuable employment lands to the east of Great
Lakes, with apparently no strategy or forethought for encouraging or
attracting anything more economically valuable to the Town's economy
than yet another Tim Horton's and yet another truck rental operation.
We would like to meet with our local Councillors at their earliest
convenience to understand what can be done to lift Bronte into a higher
economic stratum than simply fast food outlets and warehouses.
Yours sincerely,
Mike Lansdown,
Secretary, Bronte Village Residents' Association
CC:
Mayor Rob Burton
Councillor Johnston
Councillor Robinson
Brian Miller the BVRA present recently sent this email: From: Brian Miller [mailto:bmiller@millergardiner.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:47 PM
To:
mayorjackson@burlington.ca; cravenr@burlington.ca;
thoemp@burlington.ca; taylorj@burlington.ca; dennisonj@burlington.ca;
goldringr@burlington.ca; damelioc@burlington.ca; Mayor@haltonhills.ca;
Gary.Carr@halton.ca; csomerville2@cogeco.ca; janefogal@haltonhills.ca;
gord.krantz@milton.ca; barrylee@barrylee.ca; colin.best@milton.ca;
mayor@oakville.ca; foliver@oakville.ca; kbird@oakville.ca;
jknoll@oakville.ca; aelgar@oakville.ca; tadams@oakville.ca;
ajohnston@oakville.ca
Cc: Liz B.; Lorraine and Michael Quast; Laurie McGinn (at work); Mike Lansdown; Michael Glynne; Sara Alexander
Subject: Recession Recovery By-Law
Importance: High
Members of Halton Regional Council:
It has come to our attention thanks to the effort of Regional
Councillor Elgar, that the Regional Administration & Finance
committee is recommending a recession recovery by-law to suspend the
collection of the April 1, 2009 indexing portion of Regional
development charges until September 30, 2009. According to
Regional staff this will result in a cost of approximately
$3,300,000. This, in turn, would lead to a 1.6% increase in the
Regional tax bill for the taxpayers of Halton.
The Bronte Village Residents Association is adamantly opposed to this proposal!
The development industry in Halton has been tremendously successful
over the last several years and is NOT in need of any financial
assistance from the taxpayers of our Region. Further, with real
estate values moderating significantly in the past year and mortgage
rates at all-time lows, purchasing a home (especially for first time
buyers) has become much more affordable.
Accordingly, why would Regional Council ever consider asking the
taxpayers of Halton to subsidize one of the most successful industries
in our Region?
On behalf of our members and the taxpayers of Halton I urge you all to reject the committee's recommendation.
Regards,
Brian
A Brian Miller, C.A. , President
Bronte Village Residents Association
The following presentation was made by Laurie McGinn on July 3, 2007
Mayor Burton, Members of Council
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today about the
Quadrangle deal and related Heritage recommendations being voted on
this evening.
My name is Laurie McGinn and I am representing the Bronte Village
Residents Association. We have been involved in the development of the
Quadrangle since the first public presentation by Town staff in
September 2004. We have registered our opinions, provided comment by
way of presentation to Council in February 2005 and have Participant
Status at the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing on this development
application. We provided evidence at the heritage portion of the
hearing.
I come before you this evening, providing our comments with the
clear understanding that tonight's vote is a go no-go situation and
there is no room for amendments, modifications or extensions of the
negotiated deal that has already been tentatively agreed to in
principle by Council. We understand that the development is under the
direction of the OMB and that the OMB has the ultimate deciding power
in this case.
My comments are for the record and for your information from the perspective of many that find Bronte our home.
I have 3 comments.
First, after 3 years we find this negotiated deal to be yet another
surprise for the community and again with insufficient public input in
the final decision making. It is unfortunate it is made immediately
before a summer long-weekend. I understand should I wish to pursue this
issue, I am to direct my comments to the OMB.
Second – I take you back to the initial questions that staff posed
to the community about a high density commercial/residential
development on the quadrangle, presented in September 2004. I wish to
respond to these same questions as they relate to the new proposal deal
so as we can somehow assess if this was in fact a good deal from our
perspective.
- Do you feel the proposal's character reflects the Bronte Community?
Our
answer in 2004 was that it did not. Our answer today is its difficult
to know - given no conceptual drawings, 3-D models or details of the
deal that would allow one to form an opinion about its effect on
community character. We understand the Heritage Oakville Committee has
identified the Glendella House as the signature building for protection
and restoration in situ. Saving the Glendella however, has become the
sound bite for this being a good deal. The Town gave up our own
property, residential density higher than twice the highest density
allowable with the current Official Plan Housing designation and
massing that may overwhelm the entire neighbourhood.
- Do you support the introduction of ground
floor commercial on Bronte and Ontario , and residential uses stepped
back on the upper floors?
Our answer in 2004 was yes and
our answer today is yes – however we have always emphasized the issue
of massing and density. The development proposal presented in 2004 had
a residential density of 370 to 417 upsh – thus greatly exceeding the
maximum density of 150 upsh permitted in the Town's High Density II
Housing designation (Part D, Policy 1.2). The original proposal in 2004
was 300 units of 6 and 12 storey buildings. This proposal is 275 units
in 6 and 10 units. There has been a reduction of 25 units over 2
storeys.
The scale, massing, density and height has always been the major objection to the proposal in terms of planning justification.
-
Is there anything missing from the proposal that you were hoping to see?
The
development ‘deal' application as currently submitted does not
constitute a complete application from which the public can comment. In
addition to triggering the need for an Official Plan Amendment, the
necessary technical reports and drawings have not been filed to date to
enable the Town to circulate the development proposal so as to obtain
meaningful feedback from review department, agencies and the general
public. For example, proposed vehicular access arrangements and reduced
on-site parking provisions cannot be properly assessed in the absence
of a traffic impact/parking utilization study. Similarly, concerns with
shadow impacts and loss of privacy cannot be properly gauged in the
absence of proper sun-shadow drawings and full building elevations. A
tree preservation plan is also a critical planning element to assist in
shielding existing neighbours from the noise and visual impact of the
proposed development. We also are unclear as to the mandatory 5%
parkland dedication that would normally be required. Is this considered
the easement ?
In conclusion from these 2004 questions from staff – not many of our
concerns have changed. Only you know what criteria was used to decide
this was a good deal for our community. We speculate that Council
members had to choose between saving the Glendella and everything else.
If this is the case, it is a very sad reflection on our planning and
development process. Saving a historical building in situ at all costs.
Leading into our third and final point.
Our third point is Councils consideration of the previous studies
that were undertaken on the Bronte Quadrangle or Bronte community. It
is clear from all the studies, 1972, 1975 Bronte Planning Studies,
Waterfront Park Study, 1987 Streetscape Study, 1993 Bronte Quadrangle
Study, 2004/2005 Bronte Visioning Exercise – all conclude the same
thing…. That the Quadrangle property should include low rise buildings,
human scale build form and “village” ambience.
We remain of the opinion that the development proposal that is now
subject to a deal by council, like all the other development proposals
before this one – are grossly out of scale for the area and do not
support the village ambience of Bronte and will not contribute to the
historic context of the buildings. We question how successful the
historic character and ambience of the Glendella will be when it is
within 6 metres of a 6-10 storey glass and concrete building.
We hope that this process is the last of its kind in Oakville . We
hope that it serves well to sound the alarm for a new Official Plan and
even stronger OMB reform that prevents planning by compromise.
I thank you for your serious consideration in this matter. We
understand that this has been difficult with no one right answer. We
hope your vote today will provide more benefit than detriment to the
overall ambience and unique character of Bronte village.
8 May 2007
Mayor Rob Burton
Town of Oakville
P.O. Box 310
1225 Trafalgar Road
Oakville , Ontario
L6J 5A6
Mayor Burton:
We were very pleased to provide detailed comments, recommendations
and opinions regarding the interim growth management policies intended
for an Official Plan Amendment, as initiated through the Planning
Department. We are very encouraged that the Town and Planning Staff
recognize that development is out-of- control in Oakville and requires
immediate and significant leadership.
As you are aware, the Bronte Village Residents Association (BVRA)
has been an active and concerned organization of Bronte community
residents for the past 4 years. Our community has been extremely
concerned about the rapid decline and erosion of the treasured
attributes of our community. We believe the community values are well
documented by at least 3 planning and visioning studies done in the
Bronte area in the past 20 years however these do not seem to be of
paramount consideration in growth decisions. We need to solidify these
study results into an action plan quickly before any further
development applications are submitted.
At the public information meeting held on May 2, 2007, the draft
planning report regarding the Interim Growth Management Plan was
available for public review. We note the extensive consultative process
and plans for further review projects including the Bronte area. Many
members of the public commented they were disappointed that it appeared
that visioning for Bronte was starting all over again and this would,
in effect, unnecessarily delay controlling growth.
We are very excited to provide you with an innovative and creative
suggestion to expedite and complement the growth planning process for
Bronte. This proposal supports our belief that unlike other communities
in Oakville , Bronte is a tourist destination and we should continue to
preserve and enhance the public attributes that Bronte has to offer.
Our summary of Bronte valued community attributes are:
- Historic harbour character and ambiance
- Green space, parkland
- Focus on walking trails, bicycle trails
- Low rise development particularly near waterfront
- Controlled traffic
- Vibrant business community that suits the area in terms of need and variety
- Trees and Waterfront preservation
- Planned and controlled community growth
-
Appealing as a tourist destination and retain atmosphere suitable for
planned community events such as festivals, street parties and outdoor
vendor fairs
The recommendation we are presenting to you is a two-day
“Placemaking” workshop to be conducted in Bronte. This workshop would
be conducted by the non-profit, internationally recognized company of Project for Public Spaces who assist communities in their growth planning highlighting local assets, spuring rejuvenation and servicing common needs.
As previously noted, Bronte has been through at least 3 visioning
sessions in the last 20 years with the same results as noted above. We
need to move past the visioning sessions and move on to action.
The proposal is a $25,000 investment into Bronte's future and would complement the current work being done on growth management.
The company of Project for Public Spaces has a significant amount of experience in helping communities shape their future and facilitate the “ PRIDE OF PLACE ”
that Bronte already demonstrates. Their significant world-wide
experience is too lengthy to highlight herein, but can be review on
their website www.pps.org. We invite you to check it out!
We know Bronte is a community that is worthy of world-class planning
and we challenge the Planning Department to consult and partner with
professionals who indeed have the type of experience we should consider.
We welcome your support for this project and look to you in assisting us in getting this approved through Council.
Yours truly,
Laurie McGinn
Vice-President
Bronte Village Residents Association
c.c. Executive members of the BVRA
25 April 2007
Diane Childs
Planning Services Department
Town of Oakville
P.O. Box 310
1225 Trafalgar Road
Oakville, Ontario
L6J 5A6
Dear Ms. Childs
We read with interest the notice of a public information meeting
regarding the proposed interim growth management policies intended for
an Official Plan Amendment as well as the invitation for written
submissions in this regard.
The Bronte Village Residents Association (BVRA) has been an active
and concerned organization of Bronte community residents for the past 4
years. Our community has been extremely concerned about the rapid
decline and erosion of the treasured attributes of our community. We
believe the community values are well documented by at least 3 planning
and visioning studies done in the Bronte area in the past 20 years
however these do not seem to be of paramount consideration in growth
decisions.
We welcome and support efforts to control growth in a planned way
and ‘plug the holes' that have allowed development to be approved in
contravention to zoning and Official Plan objectives.
Our summary of Bronte valued community attributes are:
- Historic harbour character and ambiance
- Green space, parkland
- Focus on walking trails, bicycle trails
- Low rise development particularly near waterfront
- Controlled traffic
- Vibrant business community that suits the area in terms of need and variety
- Trees and Waterfront preservation
- Planned and controlled community growth
-
Appealing as a tourist destination and retain atmosphere suitable for
planned community events such as festivals, street parties and outdoor
vendor fairs
The BVRA believes these attributes are being eroded because of 5 reasons:
- OMB decisions that override Council resolutions
- Poor writing of Official Plan that allows for loop holes
- Lack of community values supported in Planning staff reports – allowing for ‘compromise planning'
- Behind the scenes ‘deals' on property development
- Poor transition of visioning and planning exercises into Official Plan
The idea of an interim growth management policy development is
supported by the BVRA in an effort to block erosion because it will
‘shore-up' problems related to #1, 2 and 3 above.
We wish to provide you with details of our opinions that we request
should be incorporated into the interim growth management policy in
consideration of the above comments.
Recommendations
- We strongly disagree that Bronte Village should be an area
of intensification at all and should be considered an area with no
potential for residential intensification. The current number and size
of development proposals in the planning process is staggering. Any
effort to affect intensification growth patterns being initiated at
this point, will have NO effect on the development proposals underway
now. Before this recommendation is put forward to Council, staff are
requested to review current development applications and incorporate
these applications in density calculations – including Palm Place ,
Quadrangle, Seniors resident on Bronte Road , Live-work applications
along Lakeshore Rd. , etc etc. We believe the overall impact of these
current applications has yet to be measured and should halt further
growth consideration for the next 5-8 years.
-
Require development proposals to advance the objectives of the Official
Plan, not just conform to it. The Official Plan supports meeting the
demographic needs of the community and contributes to the overall
residential type mix of each community within Oakville , in terms of
densities, low income, types of housing etc. For example, if Bronte
already has disproportionate amount of apartment dwellings, then any
development intensification proposals that are for apartment dwelling,
will not be approved. Any new development proposals should improve,
benefit and enhance the community and applications should be required
to describe how this is true and consequently be subject to community
scrutiny.
- The report identifies the Bronte
Village as an area of secondary consideration for intensification with
intensification discouraged unless compatible with
surrounding development. If a developer applies for intensification,
and the Town disagrees, it is the OMB that will decide on the
application. Exact wording and clarification of intent is extremely
important. At the OMB, any developer's planner can argue that any
development is compatible. This is a ‘loop-hole'. Define and tighten up
what is meant by “ compatible ” to avoid interpretation arguments at the OMB. This is true for other terminology such as “ transition between existing and planning development” “ adequacy of transportation system, extent that pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular access… can be maintained; “ proximity of
transit, shopping etc. These words should be specifically defined so
there is no ‘wiggle-room' and allow for less interpretation by lawyers
and planners at the OMB. Write the Official Plan with the idea it has
to be defended at the OMB and obtain expertise advice on how to do so –
proactively.
- The secondary areas of development
intensification are depicted quite generally – no street
identification. This was explained as an opportunity to provide
flexibility. We disagree that flexibility is a desirable quality in
terms of defined areas subject to intensification. The exact areas need
to be defined for clarify and to not allow interpretation by
developers; again with an idea that this would be subject of debate at
the Ontario Municipal Board.
- Encourage traffic
issues to be an overriding factor in determining compatibility for any
development proposal in primary or secondary intensification focus
locations. When Halton Regional Police Service surveys the public, the
number one identified issue is ‘traffic'. Although traffic projections
are made when development applications are made, often they are wrong
and impacts are much greater than projected. Ongoing and more realistic
traffic indicators must be completed and incorporated into application
decisions.
- The proposal identifies the Bronte
Village as an area for secondary consideration of intensification. What
exactly does “secondary' mean? What would qualify something as
‘secondary' vs. ‘primary'? You will never get development proposals
which indicate – here is my first choice and second choice. You can't
wait for intensification of the secondary areas until the primary areas
are ‘full'…. We believe the term primary and secondary are meaningless.
- You identify the Bronte Village as a secondary
consideration of intensification and changes in the zoning by-law may
be permitted if in conformity with the Official Plan. This is also
meaningless as it is a matter of opinion and can be a ‘loop-hole' at
the OMB. What does conformity mean? Conformity to what? Be specific to avoid opinion at OMB hearings.
-
Prohibit any cash in lieu provisions for parking spaces in any
intensification focus locations. This is a ridiculous contributor to
traffic and parking congestion. There are several new “live-work” units
in Bronte without business visitor parking at all.
-
Strongly recommend that this growth management process include a
strategic planning study for each of the identified areas that will be
targeted for intensification (primary and secondary) to ensure
community involvement in growth decision and growth patterns. Do not
allow lack of planning staff time to be a barrier – hire planning
consultative assistance to complete this in a specific time period.
-
Recommend provisions for all development applications to be required to
use and produce either 3-D computer modeling, and/or physical 3-D
models in the initial application. This would allow for the public to
have the most understandable representation of all future development
applications. With today's advances in computerized imaging
technology, we see no reason why this cannot become an automatic
condition of any future development applications.
-
There is a disconnect in language used - between the Town's Planning
Staff and developers, particularly within the financial considerations
of a development application. An excellent example is the
Moldenhauer proposal for Lakeshore Road in the Bronte Business
District. Moldenhauer says they must have 6 stories in order to
justify the costs attached to providing 15,000 square feet of retail
space. If it's the opinion of the community that 15,000 sq. ft.
of retail space would be an asset to the community, who will tell us
whether or not that can be accomplished at an acceptable ROI
based on 2 stories rather than 6?
- A parking
strategy for the Bronte Business District has to be in place prior to
contemplating any further development applications. This needs to
include decisions on metered parking, on-street parking (where, how and
when), municipal off-street parking (including considerations of
acquiring and building underground/above ground facilities.)
-
A plan for the appropriate location of new, additional street trees,
and the restoration and/or replacement of the current weedy, stunted
specimens, using the best practices developed by the town through their
recent UFORE study, prior to the consideration of any further
development applications.
- Complete the Transportation Master Plan to the "enhanced" level for Ward One.
-
The BDAC minutes from 15 Sept. 2005 note: "T. Collingwood further noted
that a Retail and Service Commercial Policy Study is underway and is a
Town wide study of the current status of commercial buildings in the
Town and what will be needed in the next twenty years and how much more
commercial space can be accommodated in certain areas. The study
incorporates two components - a market analysis versus policies. The
study also identifies trends in retailing and what sectors of the
retail and service commercial market are increasing and which are
relocating outside the Town." We need the results and
recommendations of those studies, prior to considering further
development.
- As intensification is considered in
any area, there is a greater need to consider appropriate storm water
management practices. The accepted “best practice” for removal of
nutrients and other pollutants from storm water prior to returning it
to the lake, is the use of storm water management ponds. As you
intensify, the few pervious surfaces that currently exist to absorb
rainwater in the built-up area, get built over or paved, resulting in
less natural filtering for storm water and a higher proportion of
nutrients and pollutants going directly into the lake. Prior to
approving any further infill intensification in Bronte's built-up
areas, define the systems of storm water storage and filtration that
must be built in order to ensure that nutrient and pollutant levels in
future storm water flows are no worse – and ideally better – than
existing levels.
- We assume that infrastructure
partners are been solicited for input on this process. Impact of
intensification affects health services/hospitals, ambulance services,
fire services, police, education and conservation authorities – to name
a few. We would like to be assured that their voices are incorporated
into the recommendations brought forward by staff. We believe their
responses should also be public. It is important that public services
are also held into account for planning for growth and be ‘on the same
page' in intensification decisions.
- Prior to any
infill intensification in Bronte is recommended, we also are concerned
that the Bronte area has fallen behind in recreational facilities in
comparison to other Oakville communities. Bronte is the largest
populated community in Oakville and does not have a recreational
centre.
- In bringing forward the report to
Council on the Proposed Interim Growth Management Policy, we would
respectfully request that this letter be included in the staff report
to Council as an Appendix.
It is relatively easy to request public consultation and to
solicit input for a project such as this. A significant amount of
public input and concern has been shown by our community on many issues
that we believe will affect our quality of life. Unfortunately, we have
been disappointed in the past with the value placed on this community
participation on important issues such as this. The BVRA is determined
to ensure that public consultation is received and considered in a
meaningful way.
We are requesting Council to require staff to report on all
recommendations and comments brought forward by the public. Further, we
are requesting Council to require staff to summarize all
recommendations and discuss each idea or recommendation individually
with staff comment on why each was rejected or accepted into the final
staff recommendations.
Due to our community's overwhelming interest in preserving our
attributes and the thought and time spend in developing the 19
recommendations herein, we would like to meet with staff to discuss and
ensure they are considered within the final report to Council. Please
contact me directly (905 825-4888) with a date and time convenient for
you to discuss.
Yours truly,
Laurie McGinn
Vice-President
Bronte Village Residents Association
c.c. Executive members of the BVRA |
