Ward 2 News Burlington | Marianne Meed Ward - Latest Comments

Re: Community benefits at risk for development complex on Caroline

Graham — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:51:00 -0000

Please, someone hire an ethics lawyer to examine this exchange of money/benefits for permission to build practice that is going on.
Just take a look at what is happening in Montreal. Is that not a lesson? Let's beat a fresh path. Get real, get clean, and get going.
A lack of ethics are causing delays for a better Burlington.
You want affordable housing for those that deserve it?... Well then maybe right on prime property in the downtown is not the right place for that. To those who approve the projects...Please rethink your planning efficiencies and relieve us of the self serving politics.
Most voting citizens are not that easily duped.
I'll need to consider where my votes will go next round, and I assume many others will too, if the delays keep on.
You want to see benefits because the buildings are tall? What about the employment this project will create during and after. It is significant and it's delayed. Meanwhile there is discussion on who pays for buried cable?
If you feel the hydro issue warrants a delay for this project, please look into why it costs so darn much to bury cables. Hire an out of province consultant. I think then, you will find some juicy information as to what slows construction growth and hurts the unemployed in Burlington. Burlington Hydro is rife with non-sense. Enough said.

Re: Should our festivals, events and city parks be smoke-free?

Mat Vino — Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:40:56 -0000

Simply remove the beer gardens and allow people to drink their beer
anywhere they want on the site. It works in other major festivals
elsewhere in Canada, so why do we restrict space for beer gardens in
Burlington? All waiters need to have their Smart Serve and a security
person could ID people when walking in the ticket line up and stamp them
once to confirm they are of legal age to drink. I think that
restricting people to beer gardens is a stupid idea. I waited more than 1
hours last year to be herded in a stupid beer garden. When I went to
Calgary I walked around with my beer freely on the festival grounds and
there were no problems, same thing in Vancouver and in Montreal. So why
do we need beer gardens?! The city is losing revenue from people who
just walk out and go drink in the parking lots and I saw a lot of those
last summer. Let the adults drink where they want and put the police in
the parking lots to watch for under aged drinking and drugs! Simple
solution to a real problem!

Re: Freeman Station: The little train station that almost wasn’t becomes the little train station that could

Margaret Lindsay Holton — Wed, 05 Jun 2013 06:59:57 -0000

Seems a natural solution to move it over near the Canal bridge. Why not make it a tourism/Burlington 'history' kiosk? One consideration is 'moisture' & elemental impact. As a wood structure it will not last 'forever'.

Re: Rezoning to allow semis suggested for St. Luke’s neighbourhood

disqus_tXfMUD7c6o — Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:38:49 -0000

Preserve the existing single family character and zoning please. We have enough intensification and traffic is becoming a problem. We need to preserve some of our neighbourhoods!
Christene Daub

Re: Beachway Report: removing residents will cost $10M for 1% more park

Jerry Fairbridge — Fri, 31 May 2013 19:33:41 -0000

Absolutely agree with you. Beachway Park works as it is. The community adds life. It's good to have an organic presence and not try to fit everything into a sterile centrally planned "vision". We've learned since 1975. Or have we?

And we don't need to nanny the property owners. We have no right to attempt to make others over to our taste. To tell people who've lived in an area for decades that they have to change to fit my vision is presumptuous at best.

Re: Beachway Report: removing residents will cost $10M for 1% more park

Bryce Leggatt — Fri, 31 May 2013 10:18:13 -0000

Leave the residents where they are. The arguments put forward to leave them in place are compelling. I would however ensure that waste water and sewage from those residences are adequately handled. Septics may be adequate, sewer hook-up would be prefeerable.
On another note, continue discussions to find ways to get rid of the hydro towers. They are an eye-sore but moreso may pose a safety issue for users of the beach, parkland and pathways.
Provide more benches, water stations, even widen the path but please don't allow more commercial enterprises to set up along this beautiful expanse of parkland. Thank you, Bryce Leggatt

Re: Beachway Report: removing residents will cost $10M for 1% more park

Glen Hebert — Thu, 30 May 2013 18:39:54 -0000

Marianne, I'm fully in support of what you say, and we should leave the residents where they are. Toronto Island is an example of the coexistence of park/housing, and I think it could serve as a model to some extent. I love the idea of moving the hydro lines.

Re: Beachway Report: removing residents will cost $10M for 1% more park

paul_g — Thu, 30 May 2013 17:21:32 -0000

1% of what? I think that is a misleading number as it is without a proper context. Second following Hamilton is unlikely to bring the right results and we have to look at the entire area, if everyone does the same there is no real space left along the beaches as a whole which is wrong and not ecologically sound. We need to think deepoer than just what the neighbours are doing or superficial appearances of a neighbourhood and do whats best for all and greenspace remains at a premium and is far less than what should be. the more we intensify which is what some are calling for no matter the wording used, more will be lsot than gained by the parkland idea.

Re: Beachway Report: removing residents will cost $10M for 1% more park

Anne Schilte — Wed, 29 May 2013 09:26:09 -0000

I as a Burlington resident quite familiar with all on this subject I suggest if we keep the 30 homes then they are to know that deteriorating sloppy etc., houses and their property will not be tolerated.
In other words if they stay their properties MUST BE kept looking decent and well looked after and that includes their yard property all around. As I haven't been there since last summer I am going to go take a look at the houses along their from the front and the back. I bike during the good weather a lot so I go by them on many occasions.. I remember the original plan from when I was in real estate in the 80's.
and had actually wondered why they were still there.
Also I feel there should be more much more park benches and the for sure the area at the end of the houses going into bridge area on the beach side; have the bushes taken down somewhat, its dark and dingy there, It can be a bit unnerving riding the bike past them and even more so in the evening..with all that is going out these days...I do not feel comfortable riding and for sure walking by that area.
I also feel there should be for sure; separate large signs for bikes as even though the walkway along Spencer has signs posted on the left side and residents CONTINUE to walk right on them and its difficult to get by them without going into pedestrians coming and going beside us.
PLEASE ENHANCE the signs...we are doing our best NOT to bring our cars down their to any of the area please let pedestrians know NOT to walk on the bicycle paths.
BRIGHTER SIGNS? thank you.

Re: Renaming proposed for Spencer Smith promenade

Thomas C. Riddell — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 20:49:45 -0000

why not

Re: No need to pit Burlington’s urban communities against the rural

Allison Thornton — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:46:37 -0000

About 80 percent of Burlington had better take note; most neighbourhoods are not currently built up to the maximum density permitted by the Official Plan. All it takes is one or two people to buy a few of their neighbours' properties on a lie and go shopping for a developer (that's exactly what happened to us on Ghent). Before you know it, the neighbourhood is gone and your elected representatives are telling you it is too expensive to side with you because as a neighbour without a spare half-milllion dollars for a slate of experts, you're a cheaper opponent at the OMB. It's like the bad old days before there were Official Plans, zoning laws and Provincial Policy Statements at all. City staff and our Development and Infrastructure Committee are supposed to promote an independent, fair, faithful and reasonable interpretation of those planning laws, but instead both they and the mayor read out the 51 instances of the word "compatibility" in the URBAN development section of the Burlington OP.

Re: City taxes up 66.5% since 2001, overall increase of 36%

Philip Harris — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 12:29:50 -0000

I have been retired for 15 years and over that time my income has slowly but steadily declined. This means that taxes are becoming a bigger and bigger part of my expenses. I believe the city should live within its income without constantly raising the tax rate. I'm sure that many other retirees would agree.

Re: Should our festivals, events and city parks be smoke-free?

Marauder Man — Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:18:35 -0000

I am more in favour of an alcohol ban at all events, as these 'beer tents' take up much needed space for non drinking citizens especially families with small children. The sound of music of 2012 was a disaster with too much space given to alcohol consumers and us sober fans were made to feel second class to their prime spots and fenced off areas. I was not bothered by one cigarette smoker last year at any city event. This to me is a non issue but the alcohol is.

Re: Village Square for sale

Denise Lee — Mon, 18 Mar 2013 22:58:12 -0000

I really hope that the Village Square stays exactly the same and is maintained to continue as it stands. Everyone that visits me in Burlington is always stunned at the beauty of this square. I bring them to the square for a walk through its beautiful architecture. It doesn't matter that there aren't a ton of businesses inside it, but there would be if it was affordable. I would like to start a fundraiser to help preserve this beautiful square. If all the owners want is tons of money then we don't have much of a chance, but if they are willing to work with the community that so desperately wants this landmark to survive then I think they should be considering these options. It would be appalling if the City of Burlington did nothing to save this landmark from being turned into yet another condo.

Re: Budget 2013: Aiming for increase near 3%

Bruce Bond — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:42:12 -0000

Taxes: Why do we always start with a high percentage and then when it is settled at half the price we are supposed to feel that we are gettin a bargain. This is a political spin. And then we compare it to higher rates in other municpalities. Another spin. We don't have to keep up with the Jones. Infrastrucure, Police, and Fire are the important ones. Let the PAC support itself.

Re: Budget 2013: Aiming for increase near 3%

Gary Scobie — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:07:09 -0000

I support a 3.5% increase as the maximum, to be directed to the need-to-haves only.

Re: Budget 2013: Aiming for increase near 3%

IamRickB — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:20:44 -0000

I would like to see an increase no more than the rate of inflation...if you have to cut services- so be it. People on fixed incomes are having a hard enough time as it is...

Re: Budget 2013: Aiming for increase near 3%

Dave Trueman — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:17:28 -0000

I support the 3.5% budget increase and infrastructure (roads, sewers, etc.) maintenance
Dave Trueman

Re: Pier: Steel delays, wind turbine cancellation reveal poor process

Danielletodd — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:06:08 -0000

I've often wondered the same thing.

Re: Pier: Steel delays, wind turbine cancellation reveal poor process

Chris W — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:31:39 -0000

If there is no wind turbine and no marina, what's the point of this pier ???

Re: On Burlington’s proposal for bike lanes on Lakeshore Road – You did it!

flupster — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:55:31 -0000

Great work, Marianne! Despite my general antipathy to cycling road warriors, I'm pleased that this decision was a balanced one. It maintains Lakeshore Road as a safe major artery while providing support to cycling--particularly local, family, and recreational cycling.

Re: On Burlington’s proposal for bike lanes on Lakeshore Road – You did it!

Dave Haynes - 16:9 — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:07:59 -0000

Thanks for your reasoned arguments on this. The proposal made little sense. At the council mtg (I was there), I was dumbstruck by attempts to justify the plan by relating sightings of lone cyclists on roadways and counts of as many as 7 an hour on Appleby!!! Kooky. As you suggested, why were people trying to fix something that is not broken?

Re: Centre turn lane on Lakeshore Road reduced for on-road bike lanes

Danielletodd — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 13:59:31 -0000

The path of which I speak is just south of new street. It starts downtown and goes all the way across the city. It's fantastic. In fact, the city of Burlington website has a great map showing the multi-use paths in the city.

Furthermore, while Lakeshore Road is not longer part of the highway 2 route, it still serves as a major thoroughfare in this area. It's not just a residential street.

Finally, just because the city doesn't give you your very own dedicated lane doesn't make cyclists unwelcome. It just means you have to share the roads and sidewalks with cars and pedestrians. I can appreciate your passion for your sport, but the suggestion that the city is anti-cyclist seems a little over dramatic.

Re: Centre turn lane on Lakeshore Road reduced for on-road bike lanes

Chris Ariens — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 20:52:18 -0000

To be fair, the turning lane is not going to go away. It will however be narrowed. A motorist wishing to pass a car that is stopped in the turn lane will have to check the bike lane first, then if it is safe to proceed, move over into the bike lane until they clear the stopped vehicle. How will that delay anyone by more than mere fractions of seconds, I fail to understand.

Lakeshore Road is not an "alternative to the highway" - it is a residential street, and should be treated as such.

What the lines on the road do do is signal to the community that bicycles have a place. There is no such dedicated place on the path, which exists not beside, but in place of a sidewalk. We might as well just put up a sign in Burlington saying Cyclists Not Welcome Here.

Re: Centre turn lane on Lakeshore Road reduced for on-road bike lanes

Danielletodd — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:45:38 -0000

As a casual bike rider, I find the bike path that runs from one side of the city, to the other quite sufficient. As a driver, I also use Lakeshore to get to my job in Oakville, and I fear taking away the turning lane will just cause traffic congestion. As it is right now, it's a wonderful and relaxing alternative to the highway.

If speed is the issue for cyclists not wanting to use the dedicated path, I would ask them to consider if bike racing in the city is really the safest idea. I don't think we should create more traffic issues in an already congested (and growing) city so these folks can live out their Tour de France fantasies.