Posts
Every municipal election, candidates make promises about the rate of growth here in Aurora. The favoured buzzword is usually managed growth, but what does that really mean?
Everyone recognizes that it is impossible to stop growth, but what can the politicians and staff really do to manage growth.
A recent article in the Era Banner prompted this question.
If historically, we have issued approx 400 building permits each year, is the new pace of 600 permits the new level of managed growth?
If so, are you happy with this rate of growth? If not, do we want more, or less?
What can we as citizens of Aurora do to let our political leaders know we are unhappy.
A second article indicated that a developer had been granted a turning lane that had previously been denied. What does this apparent reversal signal?
When the Mayor stated that the reversal was the result of careful consideration it begs the questions "what was the orginal decision based on?"
Was their a detailed traffic study conducted to support this careful consideration? What will the impact be on the already congested Wellington traffic patterns? Does this decision signal a more welcoming reception to growth and developers?
Share your thoughts!
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
In the Era Banner article, Mayor Morris said that she'll keep approving new permits, pretty much no matter what! That is wrong on soo many levels, I don't know how to begin...
First is to say that we moved here from Mississauga last year and Morris is no Hazel. I do not see any infrastructure improvements to accommodate the growth, There are NO parking spaces at the GO station and the extension to come next year might not even accommodate the current overflow, I'm afraid...
Speed limits are falling as construction goes up (Bloomington) and getting into and out of the town is harder and harder and now Wellington will get worse, apparently.
Most importantly, Mayor is hired by current residents to manage and improve this "good company" we're in...and me, as one, would very much like to see infrastructure improvements PRECEDE growth not just try to COPE with it.
I keep reading about lawyer expenses, staff issues, cloak and dagger council meetings etc.
Mayor, before you takes out that pen and "attract yet more new residents", keeping the "income" flowing, can't you just do something FOR those that hired you?
Or communicate better the possibly unknown improvements you're responsible for?
Regarding too much growth. I think we have been lucky this year in that we had above normal rainfall and very few really hot days during the summer. The issue of excess growth always comes up when watering bans are pt into effect.
Because we have not had any watering bans this year, I think one of the main issues for this town has not been brought to the fore and that is growth vs. the water supply. When we had watering bans last year, we were told that the new resovior being built on Bathurst between Bloomington and McClellan (on the Bartley-Smith lands!) would be online as early as February 2008. Well, here it is September 2008. Is it online yet? I somehow doubt it because they are still working on it.
Also, I recall that a few years ago the region was testing the mix of aquifer water with Toronto water and Evelina MacEachern became sick and had to go to the hospital. She attributed the sickness to the water mix and made a statement that the region should not make changes the water supply without notice to the residents. I hope that she does not forget that incident and makes sure that the public is told prior to the tank coming online.
Yes the town is growing too fast - and they are not keeping up with the infrastructure to support it.
With respect to the second article mentioned in the Blog Post, (re the turning lane), we know have a pretty good indication as to why PHyllis and the sycoPHants fired the CAO.
He (based on staff input) was emphatically opposed to this turning lane, but PHyllis' buddy wanted it, so of course the sycoPHants agreed.
Well, I guess in some respects, we do indeed have transparent government!
Anonymous wrote: "Also, I recall that a few years ago the region was testing the mix of aquifer water with Toronto water and Evelina MacEachern became sick and had to go to the hospital. She attributed the sickness to the water mix and made a statement that the region should not make changes the water supply without notice to the residents."
This statement is absolute fiction.
Thanks, Evelina, for clarifying that you didn't get sick from the water.
Can you tell us your views on growth vs. the water required to support that growth?
Anonymous said...
Anonymous wrote: "Also, I recall that a few years ago the region was testing the mix of aquifer water with Toronto water and Evelina MacEachern became sick and had to go to the hospital. She attributed the sickness to the water mix and made a statement that the region should not make changes the water supply without notice to the residents."
This statement is absolute fiction.
==================
I would disagree. Perhaps someone from The Auroran could research their archives - I think that Ron will find the article in question.
I suspect thatq sycoPHant MacEachern can't tell you her position on water and growth, as she has not yet been advised by PHyllis what her position is.
Now that council has given in to allow the left turn for the shopping centre, can the Separate School Board come back to the town and request a similar access for the new high school? I recall that they were mentioned as a precedent to not allow the shopping centre to have the access. It seems to me that it would only be fair.
The left-evelynb@aci.on.cahand turning lane on Wellington Street must still pass the scrutiny of the Town's plammers and traffic engineers and the Region's Ebgineering Division.
The confusion however is understandable. The Developer was given three opportunities to argue their cause before Council.On one occasion Mayor Morris declared a Conflict of Interest. It seems also the proponents had a consultation arranged for them at the region and thus carried the message to Aurora Council that the Region supported their proposal.
The original proposal for a signalised intersection was rejected by council and still is not on.
This article in the Banner strikes another nerve about this Mayor.
When she was only a councillor she claimed that residential growth did not pay for itself. She fought tooth and nail against then Mayor Jones saying that the growth in Aurora was too fast. She campaigned many times on the platform of controlled growth.
Now that she is the Mayor her comments regarding how great the new growth is and that she will continue to add new homes shows the true Morris.
Perhaps she will need the new residents to get re-elected as the current residents will know her all too well.
Well let's hope the new residents won't be fooled or better yet this Mayor will keep her promise of controlled growth.
Post a Comment