Newsletter Signup

What We Did at the Burlington City Council Meeting on May 27


If you missed our Burlington City Council meeting on Monday, May 27, here are some of the highlights of what we did:

Bill 108

Staff submitted to Council a report providing an overview of the Province’s Bill 108, More Homes, More Choices Act, which was introduced on May 2, 2019 by the Minister of Municipal
Affairs and Housing. The proposed Bill amends 13 acts, of which only three acts are subject to comment and review prior to June 1, 2019. The three acts are: the Development Charges Act, 1997 (ERO Number:019-0017); Planning Act (ERO Number 019-0016); and the Heritage Act (ERO Number 019-0021).

To read the full staff report on CM-11-19 Comments on Bill 108 and the Appendix A of Report CM-11-19 dealing with recommendations, click the links for each. Council approved to: A. Receive the comments and feedback contained within this report and forward to the Province of Ontario, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Minister of Tourism Culture and Sport, as the City of Burlington’s comments on Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choices Act), Housing Supply Action Plan; and, B. Request that the Province of Ontario continue to consult with the City of Burlington on Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choices Act), with adequate time provided prior to Royal Assent and finalization of associated regulations.

As well, we approved the following motion related to Bill 108:

Whereas the legislation that abolished the OMB and replaced it with LPAT received unanimous – all party support; and

Whereas all parties recognized that local governments should have the authority to uphold their provincially approved Official Plans; to uphold their community driven planning; and

Whereas Bill 108 will once again allow an unelected, unaccountable body to make decisions on how our communities evolve and grow; and

Whereas on August 21, 2018 Minister Clark once again signed the MOU with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, which recognizes that “Public policy issues are complex and thus require coordinated responses…” and that “The Municipal Act, 2001 provides that the Province of Ontario endorses the principle of regular consultation between Ontario and municipalities in relation to matters of mutual interest”; and

Whereas the MOU sets out that “Ontario is committed to cooperating with its municipal governments in considering new legislation or regulations that will have a municipal impact”; and

Whereas Bill 108 will impact 15 different Acts – Cannabis Control Act, 2017, Conservation Authorities Act, Development Charges Act, Education Act, Endangered Species Act, 2007, Environmental Assessment Act, Environmental Protection Act, Labour Relations Act, 1995, Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017, Municipal Act, 2001, Occupational Health and Safety Act, Ontario Heritage Act, Ontario Water Resources Act, Planning Act, Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997.

Now therefore be it resolved that the City of Burlington oppose Bill 108 which in its current state will have negative consequences on community building and proper planning; and

That the City of Burlington call upon the Government of Ontario to halt the legislative advancement of Bill 108 to enable fulsome consultation with Municipalities to ensure that its objectives for sound decision making for housing growth that meets local needs will be reasonably achieved; and

That a copy of this Motion be sent to the Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, The Honourable Christine Elliott, Deputy Premier, the Honourable Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs, the Honourable Andrea Horwath, Leader of the New Democratic Party, all MPPs in the Province of Ontario, leaders of the Green Party and Liberal Party; and

That a copy of this Motion be sent to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and all Ontario municipalities for their consideration.


I also released a statement to the media on Bill 108 and Finding Municipal Budget Efficiencies, please click the link.


Burlington’s Strategic Plan

We tabled the City of Burlington’s 2018-2022 Burlington’s Plan: From Vision to Focus; and directed the Deputy City Manager to consult with members of council on this plan and report back to Committee of the Whole on June 10, 2019 with a finalized version of the report for debate and approval.

To read the staff report CM-06-19 2018-2022 Burlington’s Revised May 1; CM-06-19 Appendix B – the 2018-2022 Burlington’s Plan; CM-06-19 Appendix A Dec. 13, 2018 Council Priorities Workshop; CM-06-19 Appendix C – About the Plan; and CM-06-19 Appendix D – the Action Plan at a Glance, please click the links.


I’m excited and proud of what we are committing to accomplish for the people of Burlington over the coming four years. The City’s long-term 25-year strategic plan reflects many of the priorities we identified in our respective campaign platforms. The plan will continue to evolve as our city changes, and our new council responds with new ideas. We are also committed to taking action in our four-year term to begin to implement the plan, where it aligns with our collective vision for Burlington.


Cannabis Retail Guidelines

We approved the Municipal Cannabis Retail Store Guidelines as set out in our City Manager’s report – to read it in full, click the link: CM-8-19 Cannabis Retail Store Guideline. These guidelines were also set out in the latest meeting of the Large Urban Mayors Caucus of Ontario by the LUMCO Retail Cannabis Committee (which I sit on).

The highlights from that meeting were:

  • The LUMCO Mayors unanimously approved a resolution from the LUMCO Retail Cannabis Committee (which I sit on) recommending additional local regulatory controls be approved by the Province of Ontario around retail cannabis stores that would:
    • A. Provide a municipality with the unrestricted ability to control the location of retail cannabis stores through zoning; and,
    • B. In the alternative to A:
      1. Limit the concentration and number of retail cannabis stores in any one municipality by introducing a minimum distance separation measure between retail stores of a minimum of 500 metres; and,
      2. Cannabis stores be restricted to commercial zones or areas that permit retail stores; and,
      3. Clearly define sensitive land uses, in addition to schools, which would be impacted by having a retail cannabis store located next to them. Those sensitive land uses would include, but not be limited to, day cares, colleges and universities, community centres, nursing homes, libraries and actively programmed municipal parks; and,
      4. The current minimum safe distance of 150 metres from a cannabis retail store to a school be increased to a minimum of 500 metres from any sensitive land use.
    • C. Have all municipalities that have approved retail cannabis stores be located in their jurisdictions (regardless of when the approval took place) receive 50% of all excise tax collected by the Province of Ontario, not limited to revenues in excess of $100 million; and,
  • The cannabis resolution also called all Ontario municipal councils to have it presented with a request to have it endorsed and sent to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the Premier’s Office; and,
  • The LUMCO Retail Cannabis Committee request a meeting with Minister Caroline Mulroney regarding the resolution and request the AMO Board add this topic as an agenda item for discussion at the AMO Annual Conference in August.


I am supportive of the resolution that we passed unanimously at LUMCO and of the guidelines that were laid out in the staff report. These guidelines will help safely provide a legal product to residents who want in locally and will help minimize the hold of the black market sale of cannabis.


Parking Standard Study

We received and filed the “City of Burlington City-Wide Parking Standards Review Consolidated Report” prepared by IBI Group, dated July 2017; and tabled planning and building department report PB-43-19 regarding city-wide parking study; recommended parking rates.

We also referred debate and approval of this item to the Committee of the Whole meeting to be held June 10, 2019; and directed the Director of City Building to report back to Council in Q3 of 2019 with Zoning By-law amendments to implement the recommended parking rates set out in Report PB-43-19.

To read the staff report PB-43-19 City-Wide Parking Study Implementation; the review prepared by IBI Group PB-43-19 Appendix 4-City Wide Parking Standards; and comments submitted to staff and Council PB-43-19 Appendix 3- Public Comments, please click the links.


A review of our parking standards is overdue and in need of an update. I am supportive of what staff have laid out in their report.


Road Safety Lawn Sign Campaign

We directed the Director of Transportation Services to implement a Lawn Sign Road Safety Campaign as described in the transportation services department report TS-02-19 Road Safety Lawn Sign Campaign. To read the full staff report and more about the campaign, please click the link.


I am supportive of what staff have laid out in their report and believe this campaign can only make our roads safer.


Information Report for application at 441 Maple Ave.

We received and filed the department of city building’s report PB-23-19 regarding official plan and zoning by-law amendments for 441 Maple Avenue. This is not a recommendation, but simply an information report on the application and no decision has been made. This particular application falls under our current Interim Control Bylaw (ICBL) and has gone as far as it can in the planning process while we’re under our ICBL.

To read the staff report PB-23-19 441 Maple Avenue – Statutory Public Meeting and comments submitted to staff and Council PB-23-19_Appendix C, please click the links.


This is a proposal for an 11-storey condo – not seniors’ housing. The application is also light on parking. I share the concerns residents have with respect to the height, density and scale of this project on this site. I support the residents’ requests for additional setbacks all around the building for green space. These setbacks work hard for us in making this a livable space, with trees giving us clean air to breathe.


Information Report for application on Surrey Lane/Warwick Drive/Georgian Court

We received and filed the department of city building’s report PB-33-19 regarding the proposed plan of subdivision, official plan and zoning by-law amendments for Surrey Lane, Warwick Drive and Georgian Court. This is not a recommendation, but simply an information report on the application and no decision has been made. This particular application falls under our current Interim Control Bylaw (ICBL) and has gone as far as it can in the planning process while we’re under our ICBL.

To read the staff report PB-33-19 Surrey Lane Warwick Drive Georgian Court – OPA, RZ, SD Statutory Public Meeting, view the staff presentation PB-33-19 staff presentation, comments from the public PB-33-19 Appendix D Public Comments and Burlington Sustainable Development Committee PB-33-19 Appendix E Sust Devt Ctte Comments, please click the links.


I think this application and the area will be a little over-developed. I feel there isn’t sufficient green space in this plan. It’s also too intense and too high in places. I’m not in favour of a new street being installed. We heard concerns over losing the community hub/centre, and I share those. We also want residents of all income levels to live and stay in Burlington — I want to see tenants maintained at the same price points. I’m also interested in seeing if these residents can be grandfathered into the new development.

Receive new post notifications by email

What's your take?

Here are guidelines before you comment, and our expectations before we will post:

  • Be civil. Would you speak this way to a good friend? If not, rewrite.
  • Focus on the issues. Build your argument and make your case in support of your opinion from facts, research or other sources. That way we can all learn. “I disagree with so-and-so because…” is fine; “So-and-so is naïve/stupid  for thinking the way he/she does and here’s why…” is not acceptable.
  • Don’t make personal attacks. Don’t assume motives of those you disagree with, make unfounded allegations, spread rumours, or engage in any other behaviours that would discourage you from participating if someone said this to, or about, you. The Golden Rule applies: Do unto others as you would have done to you. We will edit or not post comments with this type of content.
  • Say it once: When comments from the same individual or individuals become repetitive, going over ground already stated, we reserve the right to close commenting.
  • Use your full, and real, name. If wish to make a comment in public, we expect you will publicly stand behind it with your name. If you don’t want to publicly reveal your name, that’s fine; you are always welcome to share your thoughts with me privately via my email below. I welcome and consider all feedback in making decisions for the community.
  • Have fun, consider and learn. Share your views and read those of others. May we all benefit from a healthy exchange of ideas, and learn a little more about the people in our community, what you think, and what’s important to each of you. You may end up changing your mind about an issue; even if you don’t, we hope everyone will gain a greater understanding of why people have different perspectives.

Newsletter Sign Up

Phone: 905-335-7607

Constituent Assistant: Hannelie van Niekerk
905-335-7600, ext. 7689