Aurora seeks compromise on heritage plan

YorkRegion.com
July 21, 2014
Brea Bartholet

Council is trying to find a happy medium for residents living within the Southeast Old Aurora community.

After homeowners within the district boundaries shot down the proposal of a heritage conservation designation in early spring, the town is now on a mission to determine how the area’s character can be preserved without going through the Heritage Act.

The designation was turned down by council in late May after numerous residents of the southeast district expressed concern due to potential implications on their properties.

The purpose of a heritage district is to enable a municipality and its council to manage and guide future change in the specified district, as a means of conserving the area’s special character.

The boundary of the southeast designation includes properties along Wellington Street East, which is home to multiple businesses, and residences who wished to remain untouched.

Issues such as property insurance, values, owners’ rights and expropriation were just a few of the many that were presented to staff since the beginning of this year.

Councillor Evelyn Buck held her ground during the process, noting she had been against the project since the very beginning.

“I support the residents wholeheartedly and there is no merit or benefit to the town to carry out this study,” she said during a May 20 meeting packed with anxious home and property owners.

Carl Bray of Bray Heritage was brought on by council in September 2012 to undertake the study of the area.

He and his team identified noteworthy value to the district and requested phase one of the study be accepted and council direct staff to move forward into phase two, allowing Bray to define policies and guidelines of the designation for final approval.

Council chose to delay the project after receiving a lot of negative feedback.

Now, council is requesting staff take another look at what tools can be used to preserve the area and protect it from incompatible development.

Buck and Councillor Michael Thompson expressed concern regarding the motion brought forth July 15, agreeing it seems to be something already discussed around the table at previous meetings.

“I think we need to talk to residents in an informal setting to give them the proper information,” Thompson said.

“We need to let them know what policies are in place right now to give better dialogue and discussion.”

Nonetheless, council asked staff to identify other potential means of preservation.

“Everybody here understands this motion is not looking for anything that would put any restrictions on the neighbourhood,” said Councillor Wendy Gaertner, who initially brought the motion forward.

“The intent is to find a way to keep the character and find a way to keep it clear and concise for people who will move into the area, so they know what is and what is not permitted.”