Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "A Variation On The Park Theme":
The park and parking were for the soccer pitch. And a busy one at that. The 10 year and unders play (or played) there several evenings per week. The parking was perfect for participating families. We never minded using that little facility. The soccer club will miss it, as fields with adequate parking is not readily available in Aurora.
Posted by Anonymous to Our Town and Its Business at 16 September 2013 06:5
***************************
In the beginning, this park was intended to replace the town park. That didn't work out because the town park is part of the town's heritage.
The soccer pitch is nota regular soccer pitch. It is useful for nothing else but small children to learn to play. Certainly it is not useable for tournaments when parking is at a premium.
No, that park is a misdesign. The parking is formulated just as it is at the town park. And that is ridiculous.
There needs to be a correction. How much has been spent on the road and possibly underground services encircling the park, at this point of my inquiry appears to have been that much too much.
I published the comment about Councillor Gallo's address because there was no reason not to.
(I know that's a dangling participle) The Councillor's address is a matter of public knowledge.
But I never knew he lived in one of those town houses facing the park.
Of course it throws light on the subject.
Each one of those town houses has access to at least two of the parking spaces lining the park,
Twenty -four-seven.
The goalposts can't make the space between into a regulation soccer pitch and part of the town's inventory.
Councillor Gallo would have every reason to want the status quo to continue.
There's no law that prohibits him for arguing for his and his neighbors advantage.
He has declared that he lives there.
But how great the personal as opposed to the public advantage, is relevant to the weight of any argument the Councillor might advance.
That park needs a re-design even without the inclusion of an accessibility playground.
And Council needs to talk more about what that is.
I am reluctant to raise the subject but there seems to be a fast-tracked project coming to Council with the former Post Office. My sole question at this point is how this managed to get onto the agenda so quickly when there have been other proposals getting dragged back & forth for years ?
ReplyDeleteThe Salt and Peppery one seems to be fighting this pretty hard. The information about the location of his home is also interesting, it brings his fight about the lights at Target into question. I guess he feared that it would affect his sleep. When does all of this become a conflict of interest?
ReplyDelete17:04... When the person in question benefits monetarily.
ReplyDeleteThe whole subject of parks has become a quagmire. It is hard to believe that Aurora used to have an outside pool back of the George Street School where all the kids came to learn how to swim. Now we quarrel about a ' dangerous ' piece of equipment for weeks and worry about sight-lines and light and sound ' pollution '.
ReplyDelete8:32
ReplyDeleteWould the value of one's home being influenced count as a monetary benefit ? Or perhaps the granting of a permit of some kind that could benefit a long-time ally? It gets pretty sticky out there.
15:04... Did E Buck declare a conflict when the discussion of curbs, gutters and sidewalks came up in here neighbourhood? That is probably the benchmark to use in your question.
ReplyDelete