Views Shared

Good Morning,

Thank you for taking the time to put your thoughts into writing. We live  in wondrous times.

I can assure you we are also living in a rare community  of homes ,businesses , schools ,parks and wide open green space. 

There are at least seven golf courses. 

The Oak Ridges Moraine Act  places strict control on lands within the Moraine. 

The town has purchased wood lots and  substantial properties have been  transferred to ownership of Ontario Heritage. 

A Ravine stretching from St Johns Road to Wellington will never be developed  and lands 

on flood plains are similarly excluded from development.

The Town is governed by the Planning Act. Steps for us to follow when we receive an application for development are clear. If we do  not adhere to regulations, decisions are taken out of our hands and  transferred  to the Ontario Municipal Board to decide.

We are an urban municipality. Our purpose is to provide space for residential growth with all the services that make growth clean and healthy.

We are not mistresses in our own house . We are subject to Provincial authority and in some instances, federal authority. 

Except for the beginning, before governments were  formulated under the British North American Act in 1867, it has always been this way.

I think it has worked out pretty well except that  modern government intrudes far too much in our  private and personal affairs. 

I resist  it wherever and whenever I have the opportunity.

Have a great day

Evelyn Buck 

Dear members of council,

It has been brought to my attention that there is currently a parcel of land that is to go towards parkland in the north east section of Aurora.  As one of the few 'greens' in Aurora I am of course in favour of as much green space as possible.  However...I am EXTREMELY concerned with the changes that have come to Aurora over the past twenty five years since I first moved here. 

While many are positive changes, I do not think that the unending rezoning of extremely valuable farmlands to residential areas has been positive.  With a projected population growth from 53,203 in 2011 to 71,436 in 2023 (Based on the information provided in the website http://businessaurora.ca/demographicsc55.php) I would like to know where all these people are going. 

I am told that at last nights meeting, which I sadly did not attend; a councillor had assured a resident that ALL these projected new residents had been accounted for and that there would be NO new building whatsoever.  I find this hard to believe and woul 

like a written letter stating such. 

Should this be the case then yes, after a serious cost analysis, a park sounds great.  However if it should not be the case, then it is imperative that we consider building inside of current residential neighbourhoods in order to protect the very little (if any) agricultural lands that are left to us. 

Yes this is an election year, and yes these people (might) vote; but it is of the utmost importance that we start making our growth decisions responsibly and with a little foresight.  Please forward me in writing a signed letter confirming that there will be NO new building in town and that we are finished with all new builds.

Secondly, though likely more importantly; I am extremely alarmed to hear that there has been no business plan regarding this issue at all.  I demand that council consider the costs of all sides of this issue and make the best choice for the TOWN OF AURORA.  This information needs to be laid out for the residents of the town detailing all costs (I'm told one councillor did a decent job of at least reminding us all that there is more to this than meets the eye.)  This is not about getting votes, not about appeasing a few loud residents.  We need a detailed report outlining all costs for both options.  This should be considering not only the current town but a projection for the town 20 years and even 50 years into the future. 

It would stand to reason that this logic should apply to any decisions council makes on our behalf.  It may well turn out that a park is the best option, but council has a tendency to back down to bully groups (ie the possible sale of GW Williams lands where a buyer was lined up, only to back down to the 'emotional' arguement when Wells street public school closed so as not to cause more upset.)  

You have been elected to represent this town as a whole, and while I am no friend of developers I want your assurance that our town will be maintaining its integrity (what is left of it.)  If there is to be no more building work then fine; but if there is then we need to start filling in the gaps.