The Auroran has a letter to the editor about Council's decision to stop heritage designation of the S.E.quadrant.
The proponents of the plan "promise" to hold Council accountable for whatever might happen in their neighbourhood that does not meet with their approval.
Consultant and staff claimed property-owners who understood designation would not be afraid.
Councillors said, we did a poor job of communicating the meaning of designation.
Councillors seem to have a hard time understanding property-owners are perfectly capable of understanding precisely the implications of designation on their properties.
Proponents of the plan tossed accusations of fear-mongering about indiscriminately.
Both consultant and staff indicated designation was non-invasive.
Tonight's Agenda of the Heritage Advisory Committee tells a different story.
Item 1 relates to a request ny the owner to remove 83 George Street from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest .
Staff recommend the request be denied.
And further
Owners be encouraged to conserve the building.
Encouraged to work with staff in regards to submission of a structural engineering report and the
submission of a Letter of understanding to relocate the building on the subject property to a suitable
location on one of the severed lots should the owner submit an Application to the Committee of Adjustment to sever the property into two lots in the future,and
That the owner be encouraged to ensure that any new structure on a newly severed lot should be in harmony with the established context of the neighborhood in scale,design,rhythm and massing and that this be reflected in a Letter of Understanding.
At this moment I am unfamiliar with 83 George Street. It's not an old neighborhood..
The owner has the right to apply to the Committee of Adjustment for a severance.
The Committee is a quasi judicial body with authority to decide.
Comments are invited from the town and other agencies to be considered in the decision .
Staff's recommendation to the Heritage Advisory Committee is to advise Council to require the property-owner to provide a Letter of Undertaking to re-locate the building on the subject property to a suitable location on one of the severed lots should the owner submit an Application to the Committee of Adjustment to sever the property into two lots in the future.and all that other stuff
are, to my mind,intervention in the authority of the C of A and a denial of the rights of the property owner to receive an impartial decision untainted by politics.
There is nothing innocuous about the recommendation.It is not helpful advice.
It's a requirement for the owner to commit to an undertaking even before an application for severance has been made .
It imposes conditions for severance before the Committee has had an opportunity to adjudicate.
Of course, the Heritage Advisory Committee has to approve the recommendation and Council has to
adopt the Heritage Advisory Committee's recommendation before it can happen.
If the Report is not called for discussion and they rarely are, Council will approve it.
If the owner makes an application for severance to the Committee of Adjustment, as staff appear to anticipate, he will be effectively denied the fair and impartial decision he is entitled to under law.
Council will have exercised power it does not possess. It has been recommended by staff.
Item 2 and 3 of the Agenda are similar in scope.
The concept of heritage designation and protection is illuminated better than any opposing argument a property owner could present.
The decision to discontinue Heritage designation in the S.E. quadrant halved the expenditure on the
Heritage designation Study.
Clearly it has not resolved the problem for owners of properties listed in the Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.
As long as the Register exists , the problem will continue. .
ReplyDelete83 George Street is presently listed for sale @ $1,249,500 and has a lot size of 113.0' x 208.0'.
It is described in the listing as 'WOW! Simply One of a Kind" Spacious "Arts & Crafts" Home on Spectacular Private Lot Backing to Greenspace W/Mature Trees..."
George Street running north from Kennedy St. W. to Wellington contains a real conglomeration of house sizes and styles. From large and traditional to very modern to small family bungalows on varying sized lots
I am curious how the subject property came to be on the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, when this occurred and the rationale for this designation. I suggest you ask Bob McRoberts as he is probably the most qualified in terms of years of service to various town advisory committees and/or societies.
On the assumption that the house is presently sited on the centre of the property, and has an unground pool, how is it that the present owner intends to seek a severance to presumably create two equally sized lots, forgetting the pool for the moment, and relocate the house onto one of these, in the process destroying mature trees. And this not to speak of the great devaluation of his neighbours' properties on each side when two house move in menacing fashion toward the property lines.
While this house might look equally at home in Haliburton, this does not make it of "Cultural and Heritage Value."
It seems to me that this is simply another case of a designation given by people who know nought and now by a staff refusing to admit that the designation was incorrectly made in the first place.
Is staff going to start making inspections of kitchen and bathroom facilities in various homes throughout the town searching for culture and heritage, and then seizing a sink or a bidet to a repository in the town's future museum?
Oh. By the way, how did Hillview Road that runs east-west starting at George Street, and which was originally populated by a mixture of smallish single family bungalows and two-story houses get turned into a for-the-most part monster mansions. Currently two are for sale @$2,488,000 and $2,295,00.
What was the planning theory behind the utter destruction of what was once a nice, friendly, family street into a giant eyesore, where a 6,000 square foot house sits on a 50' lot, its three stories towering over a small bungalow?
"At this moment I am unfamiliar with 83 George Street. It's not an old neighborhood (sic)."
ReplyDeleteActually, it is an old neighbourhood. It was laid out in the 1870s, I believe. The house across the street, at the corner of George & Hillview, was built in the 1880s.
The house in question looks to be of early 20th-century construction (maybe the 1920s). The lot was already severed a number of years ago, and a house built beside the walkway on the north side of the George St School property (formerly the path to the old, outdoor Town Pool).
The house is presently on the market ($1.259.000). You may remember it when it was the home of Dr Armata & family.
I drive past that house every day. There is no way it can be moved to one side like a box of tissues. We seem to have a heritage planner frustrated by the failure of the s-e designation taking it out on this owner. The south-west of Aurora is not up for grabs.
ReplyDeleteGreenspace? It backs onto the old Collis Leather property - and who knows what will become of that once it's redeveloped?!
ReplyDelete"Oh. By the way, how did Hillview Road that runs east-west starting at George Street, and which was originally populated by a mixture of smallish single family bungalows and two-story houses get turned into a for-the-most part monster mansions. Currently two are for sale @$2,488,000 and $2,295,00.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the planning theory behind the utter destruction of what was once a nice, friendly, family street into a giant eyesore, where a 6,000 square foot house sits on a 50' lot, its three stories towering over a small bungalow?"
*cough* heritage conservation district *cough*
It might actually sell at that list price to someone who plans to live in it. The listing is too early to judge if there are interested parties. It may be that the land is worth more than the house and it sure is not the job to town staff to judge what is or is not appropriate.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete18:17
You should see a doctor by the sound of your cough.
It's not "heritage conservation" that's an issue here, it's something old-fashioned - PLANNING!
What's happened to Hillview is quite sad. How this Town can let that happen yet someone who wants to take down a couple of trees and replace them gets dicked around for months and God know what financial costs. How does the Town explain that? Ten's of thousands spent on studies, and plans, and we end up with a Hillview. I can see why the handful of those entitled wanting to designate a whole community heritage after seeing what happened on Hillview, but their plan was as ridiculous as what happened to Hillview. Can we not have a happy medium. What the Town is requesting from 83 George st. is ridiculous! Somehow I doubt whatever the property owners are planning won't be.
ReplyDelete