The Great Burlington Building Height Debate

[ScreamingViking]

This Spec story is a good summary of the ongoing tug of war over new towers in downtown Burlington. I think the discussion in Hamilton will be mild in comparison.


Reaching new heights in Burlington
Most buildings in downtown Burlington are two storeys. In the next two decades, plans call for dozens of towers ranging up to 26 storeys. The proposed transformation has sparked a backlash from residents.

by Carmela Fragomeni
Hamilton Spectator
February 24, 2018





A looming 'big city' skyline is threatening to dramatically transform downtown Burlington into a multitude of tall condo towers — and it is taking resident angst over redevelopment and intensification to new peaks.

Twenty-seven potential new towers are mapped out within walking distance of the downtown's coveted waterfront and lake views in the next 10 to 20 years.

Burlington Mayor Rick Goldring says it is unlikely they'll all be built, but some citizens are alarmed they could be — and at much taller heights than what has previously been approved.

Right now, the city's downtown zoning allows up to four storeys; that can go to 12 with an amendment. Existing buildings are mostly two.

Burlington city council is proposing a new limit of 17 storeys, but has already approved a 23-storey tower, known as 421 Brant, across from city hall on Brant Street. A 24-storey tower, called 409 Brant, is now being proposed on the opposite corner across from city hall.

Much of the quagmire results from Burlington agreeing to provincial policies of intensification in older built-up areas, including the downtown and areas around its three GO stations.

Intensification is being touted as the only way left for Burlington to grow its population and the city is now revising its official plan so that land use for the next 20 years complies with its growth policies.

Downtown councillor Marianne Meed Ward says residents were led to believe that if council approves 17 storeys, it will hold developers to it. But that wasn't the case in November when council approved 421 Brant.

The contradiction marked a turning point for residents, unleashing a storm of criticism and anger.

...

read more


Map of potential new towers downtown and along the Brant St. corridor, from the story:

[realcity]

Burlington has a great waterfront. That's the reason why. Hamilton by comparison looks like Dunnville.

It is also first-date-central for almost everyone I know that lives in the Bay area.

[Innsertnamehere]

The downtown is also quite busy for a suburban city like Burlington. Honestly it's probably the 3rd busiest GTA downtown after Toronto and Hamilton..

The residential density is great and will really help the downtown become something great. Looking forward to it. 26 stories is also almost nothing when you have similar sized suburbs like Vaughan putting up 60 storeys.

The anti development politics of Burlington seems unusual - the city needs the growth and actually has a fairly healthy condo market that makes these buildings financially feasible. Downtown Burlington detached real estate is also really expensive.. I'm amazed it gets as much opposition as it does. I mean Burlington has almost 200,000 people.. it isn't exactly a small town.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The downtown is also quite busy for a suburban city like Burlington. Honestly it's probably the 3rd busiest GTA downtown after Toronto and Hamilton..

The residential density is great and will really help the downtown become something great. Looking forward to it. 26 stories is also almost nothing when you have similar sized suburbs like Vaughan putting up 60 storeys.

The anti development politics of Burlington seems unusual - the city needs the growth and actually has a fairly healthy condo market that makes these buildings financially feasible. Downtown Burlington detached real estate is also really expensive.. I'm amazed it gets as much opposition as it does. I mean Burlington has almost 200,000 people.. it isn't exactly a small town.

For a city this size, downtown (while nice, some great restaurants and shops) is still rather small... basically a few blocks along Brant St., extending a block or so on either side close to Lakeshore Rd (more so on the east side of Brant). It is a happening place when there are festivals going on, especially the two big ones at the park during the summer, but it's fairly quiet at other times. The potential is definitely there for something really vibrant though.

But it's flanked mostly by older single-family homes, and I think a lot of those are owned by people who have been here a long time and like things the way they are. They're happy to see "intensification" if it's along other main roads far from where they live, or near the GO stations or the QEW. But don't dare change a thing in their neighbourhood, whether that be the built environment, the parking, or the streets. The article quotes a former city councilor and current #BurlOn editorial writer, Joan Little -- she often pines over traffic issues, how wrong the city's bike lane trial has been (along ONE street connected to the core) and the dangers of density. I believe her opinion is very representative of many central Burlington residents.

I think the mayor is taking a much more balanced view, despite his personal opposition to the tower proposed across from city hall. He seems very aware of the growth challenges facing the city -- not just the limited options for growth in population, but also those related to growth in the tax base. Employment lands are also at a premium. So making more of the prime land, downtown and at other key nodes, is going to be critical to the city's future. It won't be long before Burlington faces the same infrastructure maintenance and renewal cost issues that many older cities have been facing.

[Innsertnamehere]

Burlington has run out of residential greenfield, but still has a ton of undeveloped employment lands. And yea sure the downtown is relatively small, but it's bigger than most of the old "villages" that serve as the historic core of most GTA suburbs. It properly functions as an actual downtown with paid parking, city hall, event centres, lots of restaurants and bars, etc.

Too often cities cave and stick development where it is "easy" with little opposition, like large commercial corridors. Burlington is exciting because it's an existing historic location with a tight street grid and urban, walkable feel that allows the density to create an urban environment that is actually interesting. Condos beside suburban GO stations can't do that. Once all the currently planned condos are built downtown is going to have a much higher population, and will really push commercial and pedestrian activity to a busier level.

[LRTfan]

LOL...that rendering is hilarious. There's barely any difference in the next 100 years.

I love all these people who feel that they deserve a home to live in, but nobody else does. Incredible.
Time to start ignoring the NIMBYs in all of our cities.

[drpgq]

So with OMB gone is this the beginning of the end for Burlington high rises downtown?
Running as a pro-development councillor doesn't seem like a winning strategy.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

The article quotes a former city councilor and current #BurlOn editorial writer, Joan Little -- she often pines over traffic issues, how wrong the city's bike lane trial has been (along ONE street connected to the core) and the dangers of density. I believe her opinion is very representative of many central Burlington residents.

IIRC, Little (who was a two-term councillor when Burlington first incorporated as a city, 40-odd years ago) lives in/near the Indian Point neighbourhood, which explains her particular gripe with the bike lane.

The density issue is funny. Burlingtonians generally want to protect all of the historic properties left in downtown, they want to preserve greenbelt and golf courses, they love amenities and hate tax increases (especially as their senior population is higher than most cities). Increased residential density seems like a handy tool to support all of those ends.

If the existing official plan allows for 4 stories or 12 upon amendment, and council is in the midst of revising that upward to a 17-storey allowance, how could they not foresee the potential for additional storeys upon amendment?

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Burlington has run out of residential greenfield, but still has a ton of undeveloped employment lands. And yea sure the downtown is relatively small, but it's bigger than most of the old "villages" that serve as the historic core of most GTA suburbs. It properly functions as an actual downtown with paid parking, city hall, event centres, lots of restaurants and bars, etc.

Too often cities cave and stick development where it is "easy" with little opposition, like large commercial corridors. Burlington is exciting because it's an existing historic location with a tight street grid and urban, walkable feel that allows the density to create an urban environment that is actually interesting. Condos beside suburban GO stations can't do that. Once all the currently planned condos are built downtown is going to have a much higher population, and will really push commercial and pedestrian activity to a busier level.

Agreed. I hope some balance can be found for the density/height issue. I also want to see more employment downtown, not just retail and restaurant but more offices built into some of the condo blocks (I doubt we'll see any dedicated office buildings going up; there are a few small ones now).

In the latest edition of the new official plan there's a reference to having enough employment land until 2031 to meet forecast demand. Not sure how long beyond that there might be available tracts, but right now there are large ones remaining south of the 403 east of Aldershot GO, a few larger lots along the QEW, and in the business park west of Burloak. There's also the strip of land along the south side of the 407, on the north edge of the urban boundary. There are also opportunities for intensification on existing employment lands, which is a goal in the OP. Lots of candidates for that.

The city needs to stay strong on keeping that land prioritized for business and light industry. There will probably be a push by developers in some areas to change to commercial/retail (if not residential, especially along the 407 and 403 where residential growth has been occurring nearby in Alton and Aldershot).

[thistleclub]

How Burlington’s growing pains became an election issue
(Toronto Star, Tess Kalinowski, May 13 2018)

Kelly Childs moved to Burlington in 2008 looking to escape “the hustle” of Toronto.

It broke her heart when she learned that the block where she and her daughter operate Kelly’s Bake Shoppe had been sold to a condo developer.

The cupcake emporium on Burlington’s main drag draws thousands of customers in a busy week with the promise of luscious treats, part of a charming strip of stores and restaurants leading to the lake.

On a recent weekday morning, Kelly’s was crowded with a group of moms and babies. But directly north, the Blossom Lily restaurant, Thomasville furnishings, Elizabeth Interiors and Celli’s restaurant are already closed or have moved.

The nearby 23-storey Carriage Gate Homes development and its “twin tower” — a developer has already filed a proposal for a 24-storey sister building — are displacing those stores. The notices on the empty shop windows and impending construction across from city hall have become a rallying point for a polarized community in advance of the fall civic election.

Residents and businesses are divided among those who believe tall buildings will feed the vitality and sustainability of the city and those who worry development will drive up prices, pushing out Burlington’s character and dwarfing its civic buildings.

“I’ve never seen this kind of tension — I’m going to call it the pitchfork. There are so many residents that are waking up to it,” Childs said. “It’s like the ether has just worn off and they’re going, ‘What the heck have we been silent to?’”

Burlington is the latest battleground in the Toronto region where municipalities are struggling to welcome more residents without planting them on farmers’ fields and environmentally sensitive areas. Guided by the province’s anti-sprawl growth plan, intensification zones with denser housing are rising around newly expanded transit lines.

Early estimates in the new official plan call for an additional 14,000 people and 1,200 jobs to be added to the downtown, beyond 2041. Up to 72,000 residents and 60,000 jobs are expected in the areas surrounding the Aldershot, Burlington and Appleby GO stations beyond 2041.

Burlington’s downtown should never have been considered one of those zones, say local critics.

Childs says she’s not blaming anyone. “It’s no slight to the developers. We’re all in business and do what we do. The developers love to build, I love to make cupcakes,” she said.

But, in the absence of a compromise, Childs says, “To me (highrise) creates more a generic downtown. It takes away the uniqueness of some storefronts.”


Read it in full here