Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Surrealism in Municipal Politics":
If the tree is taken down without a permit, what would the bylaw or the neighbour be able to do about that!? What is done is done!
****************
The current tree bylaw permits removal of up to three trees without a permit.
The average urban lot is unlikely to be affected.
A new bylaw has been written but not adopted .
It's more rrestrictive. Application fees can be paid. Staff can carry out the process . Approval can be recommended. Council can still deny the permit.
You don't get your money back.
Fines under the bylawfor trees removed without a permit are horrendous.
It's the new puritanism.
If they could the tree huggers would still be burning witches at the stake.
***************
It was a former heritage planner who rejected a design because she didn't like it,.
The account served to make the point.
A restrictive bylaw registered against title of ptoperty may be intended as merely a guide.
There is no guarantee.
A heritage planner may be appointed. Academic credentials may be the best.
A question of judgement remains to be seen
Appointments are initially for a six month probationary period.
If the person recommending confirmation at the end of probation does not exercise judgement, the outcome may not be good.
A comment last week noted how much worse misjudgements are at higher levels of government and how much greater the cost.
It's true. We see it every day.
It's why local government was always most satisfactory.
Then they introduced four year terms of office.
Accountability is not the same any more.
Thank you for that clarification. I was afraid the offence was a recent one. Still residents are wary after the debacle with an individul's right to remove trees to allow his new property to be safely graded. The tendency to bully has been evident once again in this term. Usually under the guise of " heritage " which has joined " vision ", " transparency " and" culture " in ruined terms.
ReplyDeleteI believe that former heritage planner is now a jewellery designer in the Maritimes.
ReplyDeleteAurora does not need political tree-huggers. Residents already take quiet pride in doing their best to keep up their properties. There is absolutely no need for the draconian measures demanded by a few rigid tyrants.
ReplyDelete15:17
ReplyDeleteThat is not entirely true. Drive down my street and you will see how it has changed over the last 10 years as demographics change.
Once a by-law is registered against a title, it will be interpreted by whoever is in authority. It does not have shades of meaning. The proponents of the designation can make their fine speeches - they are meaningless.
ReplyDeleteNon-WASP demographics, 16:27?
ReplyDeleteReally 17:22? Let me let you in on something. I just moved to a very “wasp” street 2 yrs ago. I’m Italian a “non-wasp” or what you might call a “wop”. I think you would find most people on my street quite happy that we moved into the neighborhood, as much as we are thrilled to have moved onto a street that has great neighbors….Easy with your descriptive demographics, it really is quite embarrassing.
ReplyDelete18:52
ReplyDeleteIt's OK
There is only one of those constantly on site.
We try not to feed it.
I think 17:22 was challenging 16:27.
ReplyDelete22:09 and 17:22
ReplyDeleteAs 16:27, I was not referring to non-WASP demographics. I was referring to the change from families that tend to take pride in the property to those that are too busy to take pride. The only lawn maintenance seems to be a grass cutting every 2 or 3 weeks. No flowers, no flower pots, nothing except dandelions.
I don't know or care if they are WASP or not.
I think that people do not care. You don't see them outside enjoying the yard.
However, nice try stirring up the pot.
18:52, your indignation should probably be directed at 16:27, even without knowing to which particular ethnic group(s) were being alluded.
ReplyDeleteQuit it,,,, All of you
ReplyDeleteThat is quite enough. If no offence was meant, get over it.