Re: Speed limit changes
Our elected town councillors and mayor probably meant well. We like the 40 km/h limits, but couldn’t that have been done without one single sign coming in to Uxbridge?
Sadly, the town officials made an absolute mess when it comes to speed limits and traffic signs in our town.
Each traffic sign cost hundreds of dollars, they don’t grow on trees, but get paid for with our hard earned tax dollars. Any wonder why taxes are so high?
Check out the candidates running for election this time around, ask questions.
Hopefully forests of unneeded traffic signs will never happen again.
Also, thank you, town officials, for effectively stopping hiking groups from coming to our restaurants in town. The small parking lots at the trail heads are now empty since there are multiple warning signs asking for parking payments.
The town couldn’t have picked a better time to implement these charges.
Louise Mueller, Uxbridge
Re: Proposed park pits neighbour against neighbour – again, Sept. 15 edition
We live on Cemetery Road and were the first family to pick out a lot when Heathwood Homes proposed building on Cemetery Road and Campbell Drive.
Based on the approved site plan (approved by the town) for the community, we chose our lot and paid a premium to back onto the green space and passive park.This space was designated as EP, environmentally protected land.The park was to include a fountain in the ponds, which lasted until the development was taken over by the town and they (the town) decided that maintaining the fountain and paying for the hydro to run the fountain was too expensive. So if the town cannot afford a little hydro to keep the ponds clean, how is the town going to pay for the building and maintenance of a playground?
I would also like to respond to the figures presented at the council meeting.
First, there are 111 homes within 500 meters of the park, including Campbell Drive, Cemetery Road and Kriton Court, so if the town received 15 letters opposing the playground, that would mean there could only be a maximum of 96 residents within 500 meters of the park who are for the park.
Second, it was presented that there are 132 children under the age of 18 living in this neighbourhood. I did not survey the neighbourhood to check on that number, but I was also never asked by anyone how many children we have living in our house. But more importantly, how many children living in the designated neighbourhood are within the age group that would use the playground? I do not see children above elementary school age playing on swings and merry-go-rounds, etc.
I would hope that before any decision to change the approved site plan was considered there would be a more decisive proposal with actual numbers of residents (children of elementary school age or younger who live within 500 meters of the park) who would use the park and the true costs of building and maintaining the park.
Dan and Angela Lawrence, Uxbridge
Re: The Township Empire: the Historical Centre
The Historical Society (Uxbridge-Scott) was started before the museum. It was formed in the spring of 1971. A main incentive to create a local historical society was that the next year, in 1972, Uxbridge would be celebrating the centennial of having officially become a village in 1872.
In 1972, the former Quaker Hill School was offered for sale by the then Ontario County Board of Education. The three municipalities, Uxbridge Town, Uxbridge Township and Scott Township, rented the school from the board for $1 for use as a museum which was to be operated by the Historical Society. This was successful, and the next year, the three municipalities bought the school property for $15,000.
I was not the first curator. There were two part-time curators for the first years of the museum who worked during the summer months. I became curator in the early 1980s, and worked from March to November. I was hired by the Township of Uxbridge, and fortunately my salary was paid over 12 months so I could receive the Ontario Municipal Employees benefits.
Allan McGillivray, Zephyr