Residents' Association
|
What is the WHRA * Mission Statement * Boundaries * Committee members * Becoming a member Area's History Local Concerns Meetings and Events Gallery Four-Legged Residents Related Links |
Following are some local comments and concerns submitted using the form below.
What are the future plans for the light house in the harbour?
Editor's note - see some of the old lighthouse's history. Also, the latest issue of the Historical Society's Newsletter has a feature article on Oakville's lighthouses.
High speed truck traffic at night on Rebecca Street. Many of the homes on Rebecca between Wilson and the Creek are very close to the street due to expropriation in the 1970's to expand Rebecca to four lanes. Although Rebecca is not the designated truck route and is lined with little homes - many trucks take Rebecca between 11 pm to 7am and travel at excessive speeds.
Editor's note - Rebecca Street is to be modified to a three-lane roadway (two lanes of traffic, one centre/turning lane, and two bike lines) similar to Lakeshore.
We are very concerned about the 33% increase in MVA on our home. This and the anticipated increase in the mill rate will result in a huge increase on our Property Taxes.
Editor's note - The WHRA will have an announcement regarding the Assessments in early January - the Town says they will have the recent 2001 data available on thier web site sometime in January.
New assessment increased 106 thousand dollar increase...way out of line with rest of the town areas.... not in keeping with the actual selling prices of similar homes in the immediate area. Can we lodge a joint appeal for review... Can we find a web site that has useful information..eg this years assessment..not last years!
Editor's note - See above.
Taxes - I decided to wait to input information on taxes. My 2003 interim bill arrived today and it showed an increase of 25%. I don't think that any tax increases for this year has been included. The assessed value increased by about 40% from the last one. I'm sure that the powers that be will tell me that there has been an explosion in property values in this area in the last few years thus the reason for this increase. I guess this is in part the result in our vote for Mike in 1995 + 1999. I wonder if the income tax reductions cover these increases.
Editor's note - See above.
Right now my parking lot is overcrowded with parking from every business in the neighborhood eliminating spaces for my customers. We need help in getting the town to build some parking in this area (John Street/Kerr Street). We are paying high taxes for this lot and have no revenue but constant battle with users.
We recently moved into our new home at 122 Brant Street. We learned about West Harbour Rate payers Association through Paul Visser. We have a few questions which you may have encountered before:
1. Is this area of Oakville called West Harbour, or Harbour West? Across the street the homes are sold as being in Harbour West.
Editor's note - The townhouse development project is called Harbour West but our area is West Harbour.
2. Why do the Town Christmas decorations end at the east side of the bridge? Are we the forgotten part of Oakville?
Editor's note - The downtown area merchants pay a hefty tax as part of the Business Improvement Association. Our region's merchants do not.
Regarding Daniels/Sharkey's Redevelopment: I BELIEVE THIS DEVELOPMENT IS APPROPRIATE AND NEEDED IN OAKVILLE. A HIGHER DENSITY IS REQUIRED TO PRESERVE GREEN SPACE. THE VIEWS OF THE WHRA COMMITTEE DO NOT REFLECT THE VIEWS OF ALL THE MEMBERS.
The Sharkey's site offers a unique opportunity to enhance the downtown core of Oakville or just the opposite. What the Daniels Group are proposing is significantly better than the current towers - hopefully two doesn't justify building a third. While I am not an Engineer I would have hoped that a development could be built utilizing the existing sloped site that would allow enough density to make the project economically viable for the developers and more aesthetically in keeping with the downtown core.
My concern is that the Daniels Group have purposely proposed a development density so far above the 50 units per hectare that a perceived compromise will still be substantially larger than the original allowance.
I agree with the comments of Peter Kenny regarding Daniels/Sharkey proposal. Contrary to comments made on the web site --- there are in fact more than a few resident interested in the Daniels proposal proceeding. This was evident in those residents who attended the focus meetings held by Daniels on Jan 15 + 16 at the Oakville Club. My wife and I would like to see the project proceed.
We are highly opposed to the Daniels Group proposal. We would be happy to see 3-4 level townhouse complex.
I think I would rather see a tall slim building than a lower wider one but 19 floors is far too high.
|
|
To Top of Page
