Tim the Enchanter has left a new comment on your post "Hopes And Dreams":
Anon 805P
Adelaide Street is headquarters for the Ontario Heritage Trust.
I'm not a believer in the simple "Release the bulldozers!" approach and folks such as Chris Watt should be commended for their efforts to remind us that Aurora does have a heritage and it is important.
However it seems, the practical considerations, such as costs, associated with preserving heritage are so often left out of the conversation.
The Browning house for example(up until a few days ago).
How much to restore it?
Do we/can we order the owner to restore it?
Do we/can we compel the owner to sell the home only to a buyer that is committed to restoring it?
If the Town is committed to restoring the house do WE have to buy the place and THEN restore it?
What would that cost?
The property would then be off the tax rolls - how much does that cost?
Who pays?
What happens after we restore it?
Who pays for utilities and maintenance?
Do we open it to the public and charge admission?
Do we have to pay for staffing?
Nothing wrong with the preserving heritage but you need to bring the WHOLE story to the table so we can make informed decisions
******************
The last amendment to the Ontario Heritage Act gave municipalities power to designate a property as heritage. Previously it could only be done with consent of the owner.
"Wonderful", Aurora said,
We promptly spent thousands of tax dollars on a consultant study and designated an entire neighbourhood.
Wouldn't you know. it was the north-east quadrant.... with the crazy traffic calming plan. It brought more tourists to Aurora than any who came to see the extra-ordinary heritage neighborhood..
We are currently spending another $60,000 on a heritage study of the south-east Aurora neighborhood.
When the traffic calming contract award of $211,000 was being
discussed in a council chamber crowded with belligerent people from"the neighborhood ", the former Mayor assured them they deserved the calming plan because they were "special"
Much the same as governance of Church Street School was "special" when she drew up that pesky contract without assistance or interference from a town solicitor, because, don't you know, heritage and culture nurture looks good in campaign literature.
If you can claim credit for all the history and culture of a two hundred year old municipality, that should make a candidate a shoe-in to office for the next several decades.don't you think.
But I digress.
A motion is coming forward which will compel the town to take action to compel owners of heritage to maintain their properties. .
It's in response to the suggestion the owner allowed the Browning house to fall into disrepair because of intent to demolish it and if it was in such bad shape the town would be forced to issue a demolition permit.
There is absolutely no evidence to support such a suggestion.
When the Province gave municipalities the right to designate properties without owner consent, they gave owners the right to apply for grants or loans from the municipality to pay the cost of maintaining the property in its authentic state.
I voted against the designation of the N.E. quadrant neighbourhood
for two reasons. I do not believe it is an advantage to the municipality. On principle, I am not prepared to contribute a cent to the cost of repairs to private property.
Furthermore, if we carried the principle of authenticity to the nth degree, instead of re-constructing streets , installing chicanes and sidewalks and "rolling" curbs, which are no curbs, we should have torn up the asphalt, demolished the sidewalks and returned the streets to conditions when mode of transport was horse and buggy and shank's pony.
Residents in heritage neighborhoods should not be allowed to own cars. They too should be disallowed to drive automobiles within the confines of their " special" neighborhood.
If the rest of us can't drive on "their " streets, they should not be allowed to drive on "our"streets.
It's not my argument. It's theirs
.A resident recently came forward as spokesperson and contended to Council ,only residents of the neighborhood should be able to participate in the current review of the traffic calming, closed streets and traffic obstructions, to discourage drivers from outside the neighbourhood ,who had by the way paid for the streets and the obstructions , from actually using the streets to get from here to there.
Anyway, to get back to Tim's and Chris's points, we have all the power we need to maintain every so-called heritage property.
We can finance re-roofing, .chimney pointing, foundation repairs, you name it, the town can fork out your tax dollars to pay for it.
Your own house can be falling down around your ears and not a penny of assistance is available , but the town can make you pay for someone else's because it is in a "special" neighbourhood.
Needless to say Pollyanna regulations and recommendations all come from the public service.
They have a different perspective about taxes than the rest of us.
Understandably so.
It seems the majority of our current council have not yet realised the fact. They think the administration and the political arm of the town's governance have the same objective.
When the town treasurer uses the phrase ''needs not wants"to justify budget increases, they think he means the same thing the taxpayers might mean.
By the time they realise the truth, after they've spent money as though it grows on trees, the lesson will have been learned too late.
My friend Chris can indulge himself in single focus ideas about heritage property He has that luxury.
I have opted for and been granted , with the assistance of Chris I may say, a different responsibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment