www.oakvillebeaver.com · OAKVILLE BEAVER Thursday, February 25, 2010 · 4 Town gives thumbs down to Burloak shopping complex By David Lea OAKVILLE BEAVER STAFF Town council has rejected plans to build a new Oakville shopping complex at the northeast corner of Burloak Drive and Rebecca Street. Representatives of the developer (Great Lakes Marketplace) pled their case during Monday night's Planning and Development Council meeting, asking councillors to consider amendments that would allow for the building of the 133,000-square foot development. The proposed shopping complex would consist of nine buildings with a grocery store and a drug store serving as the anchoring tenants. A number of smaller retail and/or commercial units would be housed within the other buildings. "We believe the site is an ideal location for retail and service/commercial uses given the location at the intersection of two major arterials, Burloak and Rebecca," said Peter Smith, a consultant for Great Lakes Marketplace. "The Town's peer review consultant who reviewed the application also came to the conclusion that the site was an appropriate location for retail and service/commercial uses." Councillors don't want employment land used for retail and commercial development Smith said the proposed shopping centre McMullen, BVRA Board member and candiwould support the Great Lakes Business date for Ward 1 town councillor. "We pointPark planned for the area and would create ed out at that time that the proposed shop275-300 full-time equivalent jobs for the ping centre would be an egregious waste of area. employment lands "A job is a job. There are many people This was not that could be put to enough for some resi- who have full-time jobs in retail, who far better use by dents, who have voiced make careers in retail. The labelling of pursuing remunerconcerns about the some jobs as being inferior to other ative live/work problems a new shop- jobs and making planning decisions opportunities that ping centre would on that basis is something I find would benefit the bring to the area. local community." particularly repugnant." These worries This view was included increased also shared by Town n Peter Smith, consultant for traffic, pedestrian safestaff, who recomGreat Lakes Marketplace ty, buffering of the mended council adjacent residential reject the developarea and unwarranted competition for exist- er's application. ing retail outlets like the Burloak Shopping Smith disagreed with this logic. Centre -- just a few kilometres north of the "Retail and service/commercial uses are proposed site. an employment use," he said. "I know that Using up the Town's limited amount of there is confusion regarding that point in employment land for retail and commercial some corners, but the fact of the matter is uses was another concern put forward by that retail and service/commercial uses genresidents. erate jobs and in this instance we're estimat"The BVRA (Bronte Village Residents' ing 275 to 300 jobs just on the site itself Association) recommended against this pro- without taking into account the synergistic posal in its letter of Oct. 23, 2009," said John or supportive effect that retail and service/commercial uses would have for the remainder of the Great Lakes Business Park." When asked by Ward 3 Councillor Keith Bird what the income level would be for people working at the proposed development, Smith said it was important to have a wide range of employment available to provide opportunities to all segments of the population and not just certain segments. When asked by Ward 4 Councillor Allan Elgar if the jobs the development provided would be `real office jobs' or `McJobs', Smith said it wasn't right to call some jobs inferior to others. "A job is a job," he said. "There are many people who have full-time jobs in retail, who make careers in retail. The labelling of some jobs as being inferior to other jobs and making planning decisions on that basis is something I find particularly repugnant." In the end council stuck to their conviction that the development proposed for the area is not the type of development needed. Town staff said the developer cannot appeal the ruling to the Ontario Municipal Board as the developer's application essentially asks the Town to convert employment land to non-employment land. Smith said the developer could appeal because, in their opinion, the application does not ask for this conversion.