{"id":23521,"date":"2019-04-11T20:43:43","date_gmt":"2019-04-12T00:43:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/?p=23521"},"modified":"2019-04-11T20:43:51","modified_gmt":"2019-04-12T00:43:51","slug":"resident-angered-by-stable-neighbourhoods-presentation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/resident-angered-by-stable-neighbourhoods-presentation\/","title":{"rendered":"Resident angered by Stable Neighbourhoods presentation"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

(Re: Council looks for area-specific restrictions in Aurora\u2019s Stable Neighbourhoods, April 4)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a concerned resident of the Aurora Heights\nneighbourhood, I attended the March 27 meeting at Aurora Town Hall concerning\nthe ZBA-Stable Neighbourhood study \u2013 three neighbourhoods including the Aurora\nHeights Subdivision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here are my impressions of what transpired:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A spokesman for the Town gave an extensive speech\noutlining the criteria for future development and renovations of dwellings\nwithin the three study areas. This was not criteria for stability, but a more\nonerous position to destabilize our neighbourhoods. It included changes\nallowing huge footprints and square footages nearing 4,000 square feet;\nbuilding heights topping 29 feet; sloping third-storey rooflines creating\nknoblike appearance to the final level; architectural control of exterior\nbuilding materials (brick), and garages set back from the building frontage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The controls were dictated without a proposal for a\nresidents vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I felt angry as a 50-year owner in the subdivision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was no masking the elitist intent with no concern\nshown for the elderly, widows or widowers, first-time homeowners to be, new\nfamily formation groups, and our children who will not be able to afford to buy\nhomes in the community where they were raised, attended schools, and made their\nfriends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many of us love our 1,100 to 1,200 square foot bungalows\nwhile the Town seems intent on redevelopment, producing large, showy homes in\norder, I suspect, to raise the tax base.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am not against individuals improving their own homes,\nbut 3,900-plus square feet is too drastic a change when most of us are quite\ncontent with our 1,100 square feet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why not 2,200 to 2,500 square feet? That\u2019s another\narbitrary number just like 3,900 square feet. In fact, the larger allowable\nbuilding size will attract developers who gain greater profit per square foot\nby producing larger homes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Builders have already entered our subdivision and have\nproduced several monstrous-looking houses. I can envision the next phase of\nthis drama where real estate agents from all over the GTA start calling and\ndoor-knocking, bugging us to list our houses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They will say, \u201cWe think we can get you $$$$$$$.\u201d Another\nagent in their office may be working with builders. Who will these out-of-town\nagents really be working for? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once this evolution begins and huge homes are created, we\nwho love our low-rise subdivision will be pushed out by a new unfriendly,\nalien-looking neighbourhood plus a higher per lineal front footage tax base\nimposed on our property frontages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Following the presentation by the Town, residents were\ngiven the opportunity to address their concerns. Nearly all the speakers were\nopposed to the Town\u2019s proposal. Most of us applauded the speakers, although the\nMayor announced that we should discontinue this practice since, he said, the\natmosphere was becoming hostile.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He was right; the Town\u2019s covert strategy of dictating a\nmajor imposition on our lives was too much to bear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A resident speaker from an upscale fringe area attached\nto the Aurora Heights subdivision said our homes had approached the age of\neconomic obsolescence, and that they were beginning to crumble and insulation\nand mechanical systems were obsolete.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I wish I had been able to tell him about the houses in\nEurope that are a couple of hundred years old and are still well-maintained. As\nI implied, there are a variety of attitudes amongst people of different\neconomic circumstance. These opinions and biases suit their reality which some\nwill try to impose on others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some of the speakers said they had collected names of\nresidents who are opposed to the Town\u2019s supposed \u201cstability study.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the Town Council intends to impose their regulations\non our community without allowing residents to vote, I suggest we band\ntogether; dividing the neighbourhood into canvassing grids; and poll owners who\nare both for and against the Town\u2019s proposal; and having each sign their names\nand, if need be, the petitions could be submitted to the ombudsman\u2019s office. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

After all, we live in a democratic country and expect\nfairness by those who govern us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I volunteer myself as one of the canvassers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ron Miller
Aurora<\/strong>

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\r\n\"Facebook\"<\/a>\"twitter\"<\/a>\"mail\"<\/a>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

(Re: Council looks for area-specific restrictions in Aurora\u2019s Stable Neighbourhoods, April 4) As a concerned resident of the Aurora Heights neighbourhood, I attended the March 27 meeting at Aurora Town Hall concerning the ZBA-Stable Neighbourhood study \u2013 three neighbourhoods including the Aurora Heights Subdivision. Here are my impressions of what transpired: A spokesman for the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-23521","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-letters-opinion"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3D2k4-67n","publishpress_future_action":{"enabled":false,"date":"2026-04-23 10:59:40","action":"change-status","newStatus":"draft","terms":[],"taxonomy":"category","extraData":[]},"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23521","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=23521"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23521\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23521"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23521"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23521"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}