I asked the consultants, if at any time during the study anyone had ever suggested picking up Aurora station and moving it outside of town.
At a time when people cant afford to buy enough square footage to raise their families, why are we using up ever more of the heart of our community, for space for cars to sit empty and idle twelve hours a day five days a week.
The traffic consultant looked to the Mayor for permission to speak. But the question was not answered.
Number One consultant offered that Newmarket is currently doing that. We know it has been done in Maple and East Gwillimbury as well.
In Aurora, we have a massive, out of scale, concrete structure that is apparently and predictably not being used.
Neither is it built at an angle in its space as the Fol-De-Rol Study envisions on Yonge Street immediately north of the Wellington Street intersection.
Who ever heard of a higgledy-piggledy street scape built on angles.
I can't even put a carport over my driveway because it would spoil the line of the street scape of my street.
Remember how Councillor MacEachern voted against approving in principle the Yonge-Centre development proposal until after completion of the Fol-De-Rol Study.
Councillor Gaertner didn't want a variance to a sign on the canopy of a gas station considered at the corner of Yonge and Aurora Heights, until the wonder- of- wonder study was done.
Did I tell you about the Centres of Excellence included in the study. In planning language that would be institutional use. But such mundane language is hardly fitting for the much- heralded document.
Only in Aurora, you say.
Yes but only on paper, I say. It is expensive verbiage
Mr. Givens of Malone. Givens and Parsons , Planners, waited to be last to speak at the planning meeting. He did what Planning Consultants always feel they must when addressing Municipal Councillors.He was representing several land-owners . It's necessary to be persuasive.
He was full of praise and appreciation for the excellent work done by the Steering Committee. Then he raised a point on behalf of his clients .
The Town's consultant noted sixty points in all out-standing in the concerns of the landowners.
Procedures have already begun on their behalf at the Ontario Municipal Board.
From the response given by the Mayor to their concern, it appears Smart Centres may be compelled to go the same route.
Having the Five Year Revision of the Town's Official Plan decided by the Ontario Municipal Board is not the best use of town resources.
Adopting the Revision at last knocking, after nominations are closed and before an election isn't best political practice either.
Monday, 13 September 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi Eve,
I have question not related to this particular post.
I just had a look at the Mayors web site and at the bottom of the page it says
"authorized by Phyllis and the CFO"
what does the CFO have to do with her personal website?
cheers,
May I comment about the GO parking structure.
As a left-leaning socialist (you did run under the NDP ticket a few years ago) public transit is one of the primary planks in your platform.
The parking structure is large - I agree - it also happens to be where the tracks are. The station itself is not required for GO to function - they could use a construction site trailer for that matter. Where else on the line would you put a train station and parking lot? Maybe the Hi-Tor property?
However, I feel the parking structure is a chicken and egg thing. We are currently restricted to 4 trains each way per day. In order to increase the frequency, you need the ancillary services around it - hence the parking. But now, people are looking at the structure under used - well, we don't have the increased frequency yet!
People don't use the GO service because it is under provisioned. First it was the small parking area. Now it's the lack of service. Others complained about the schedule. The Lakeshore trains run all day and on weekends. Why are we the ugly step-child in the GO network?
Post a Comment