Community Reflection Space now complete, but finished product raises Council questions

October 1, 2026 · 0 Comments

Intended as a space for residents to meet and find fellowship in tragic and challenging times, the Town of Aurora’s new Community Reflection Space is now complete.

Finished as part of work to reconstruct the busy parking lot shared by Aurora Town Hall and the Aurora Seniors Centre, the Community Reflection Space was originally proposed by Aurora’s Indigenous Relations Committee as a place for Truth & Reconciliation, and the vision expanded to be a peaceful place where community members can gather in times of tragedy and mourning.

The Reflection Space is built in the southern forecourt of Town Hall where a large – but subsequently failing – evergreen once served as the Town’s Christmas Tree.

But, as much as it was intended to bring the community together, Ward 5 Councillor John Gallo said the finished product does not fully reflect the designs originally presented to residents and subsequently approved by Council.

Remarking on the project at the end of last week’s Council meeting, Gallo said the accessibility ramp on the east slope of the reflection space, intended to create a greater link between the space and John West Way, was not finished, nor was the intended repositioning of existing flagpoles and the addition of a fourth.

“When we came to Council with the presentation, it was early days in the draft and the design report does speak to two options,” said Town Treasurer Rachel Wainwright-van Kessel, responding to the Councillor’s concerns. “Our goal ultimately was – first choice would be to have the ramp. It was also communicated in the Accessibility Advisory Committee that we will do our best to add the ramp. That obviously was a wish-list item. As such, to be sure we could manage the contract and manage the cost of the project, the ramp was put in as provisional, knowing that was an optional item that was presented.

“Similarly, the fourth flagpole was an option, simply because it was something that we could accommodate within the current structure. Accessibility wise, the access off of John West Way can be accommodated around the property. It’s coming around the actual sidewalk entrance off of John West Way is certainly an accessible route, and subsequently, when the cost did come in, those items were far higher than we anticipated and we needed to do some value engineering of the project. As such, being a provisional item, we had the ability to remove that component of the accessible ramp and the flagpole because knowing that we were still meeting the basic objectives of accessibility and certainly reaching community services through the ability to still raise flags to support the community needs…they were removed to try to mitigate costs within the budget of the project.”

Councillor Gallo said he was “extremely disappointed” with the decision and said the potential of these removals from the project should have come to Council for approval.

“When I sit here and I vote for something, and I watched the Accessibility Advisory Committee video, and I didn’t hear a lot of complaints about the ramp. The report that I agreed to says the preferred option introduces an accessible ramp. An alternative option would be established a secondary entrance. Neither of those two exist today, and if they were over budget, and we as Council approved these things, why wouldn’t staff come back to us and say, ‘Hey, this is the additional cost. Do you really want these things?’” said Councillor Gallo.

“It doesn’t sit well with me. When we sit here, we read reports, we give authority to go ahead and things are removed without our consent to reach a budget. [There was] plenty of time to come back to us and say, ‘Hey, [the] flagpole’s got to go. This has got to go, or you got to increase the budget.’ That would have been the appropriate course of action. Not internally making a decision for me that’s contrary to what I decided based on what I had in front of me. Extremely disappointed. That is not how we operate here. If I’m rude, I’m sorry, but that’s not how we operate here. If Council’s decisions don’t mean anything, what are we doing here? It’s taxpayer’s money. We’re voted in to make decisions. We make decisions and significant pieces of a capital project are removed. That’s wrong. “

Disappointment was also shared by Councillor Wendy Gaertner, who said “a lot of time” was spent at the Accessibility Advisory Committee discussing the project and the Committee’s “understanding that that’s what we were voting for.”

“I’m sorry that accessibility had to take a fall because we didn’t have enough money. That’s just not right,” she said. “I think the people in that community will be very disappointed to hear this because we spend money on other things that they might consider less important.”

By Brock Weir
Editor
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter