Go Back   BuildingHomes.ca - Building your community! > Ontario > York Region > Stouffville > Stouffville - Mattamy On Main and Wheler’S Mill

Stouffville - Mattamy On Main and Wheler’S Mill For residents and soon-to-be residents of Mattamys On Main and Wheler's Mill.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 2008-02-25, 01:53 PM
Ian and Amanda Ian and Amanda is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 171
Unhappy Greenspace on north side of Little Rouge Circle

I just wanted to post a friendly reminder.....

The strip of greenspace that runs behind the houses on the north side of Little Rouge Circle is NOT a walking path.

On any given day or evening I can look out my back windows to see people walking and dogs being run down this strip. I would like everyone to please be aware that there are numerous saplings planted by the homeowners trying to survive the winter along this strip. They are, consequently, being trampled.

In addition, I was out in my backyard this afternoon and noticed a large pile of dog poop right against my fence! Just left there!

I, and I am sure the other homeowners along this side, would like to ask that this greenspace be respected. It is not to be used as a strolling path, a short cut, nor a dog run. We would like to keep our community beautiful, and our homes respected.
__________________
Ian, Amanda, Autumn, & Declan
Lot 158, Wheler's Mill
Farnham B
Moved In!

Last edited by Ian and Amanda; 2008-02-29 at 10:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 2008-02-25, 01:59 PM
TomC TomC is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 256
Default

What was the argument raised by the residents in opposition of the walking path? Phase 4 calls for a possible walking trail along the east side of the development, just east of Grice Crescent, and I'm wondering if the same thing might/could happen.

Did the town clear the area behind your homes in anticipation of the trail, or were the lots already set back from the tree line to begin with? I would think if it is designated as green space that the town would fence off the area..

TomC
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 2008-02-25, 02:07 PM
Ian and Amanda Ian and Amanda is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 171
Default

Mattamy cleared it, but then the path was stopped. The strip of land was then donated to the Conservation Authority.

The path was not disclosed to us when we purchased our homes and we paid a good premium to back onto that greenspace. We paid extra money for the privacy and nature, and a walking path would eliminate that privacy by leaps and bounds.

Now that natural setting and our privacy our not being respected, which is very disappointing, and very aggravating!
__________________
Ian, Amanda, Autumn, & Declan
Lot 158, Wheler's Mill
Farnham B
Moved In!

Last edited by Ian and Amanda; 2008-02-25 at 03:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 2008-02-25, 02:33 PM
MaxJay MaxJay is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 343
Default

My partner and I discussed this scenario yesterday. We were talking about the protest that held up development of one of the Mattamy communities because people who lived on a court that was to be developed into a thoroughfare changed their minds and decided that they didn't want that to happen.

I do understand where you are coming from. Of course you want the additional privacy etc... My concern is that people enter into an agreement knowing that certain development plans are in place and then they decide to protest against these plans in their own best interest (neglecting the greater good of the entire community). When people move into what used to be pristine land they often have no objections to development. However weeks after they move in they want all further development to cease. This doesn't appear to be the situation in your case but unless you explicitly got something written into your contract I don't think that it should be surprising that some form of development was inevitable.

Obviously I don't have any background about this particular green space (there may or may not have been legitimate concerns about environmental destruction etc.). However, the fact that so many people are using it leads me to suspect that someone in the development and planning department missed the boat in ensuring that the entire community's voice was heard when the decision was made to eliminate the path.

I also fail to see how people who are using this space responsibly are causing any disrespect towards your property or that of your neighbours. If there is a fence there the delineation between your land and public land is very clear. People may be destroying the saplings and that is extremely unfortunate. However, you and your neighbours had no right planting the saplings to begin with (if I interpret your original posting correctly they were planted on public land).

Like I said, I can completely understand where you are coming from. I also think it's important for you and your neighbours to look at it from another point of view. One of the first things that we looked at on the community models was the allocation for green space and trails. I'm extremely alarmed that the town is so easily swayed to alter plans. The case of this particular greenspace isn't so black and white, I'm just worried that other people who back onto such places and do have full disclosure will try to use similar tactics.

PLEASE NOTE: I changed this post as soon as I read your response to TomC's questions.
__________________
Emily & Jason
Phase III Wheler's Mill
Laketon A
MOVED IN!

Last edited by MaxJay; 2008-02-25 at 02:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 2008-02-25, 03:32 PM
Ian and Amanda Ian and Amanda is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 171
Default

We did look at the allocation for paths and greenspace (as they are also important to us), and there was not a path there. As I said previously, we purchased this lot backing onto greenspace. It is in our contract and on our land survey. Mattamy had an obligation to inform us that there was to be a walking path behind our homes. It was not in the original land/space designation.

The people who purchased on a court that was to be changed to a through fare had every right to protest IF their land survey and contract with the builder indicated they purchased as a home on a court. The land is to be surveyed and designated for specific use prior to being sold. The town and the builder have no right to go in and change it without the input of the land/homeowners that they will be impacting - unless there is a dire situation that requires otherwise.

The fight would not have been easy, nor taken lightly. The town was not easily swayed to alter plans. I think that the reason they did was given the situation that surrounded the designation of this land as a path. I totally understand what you are saying.

That strip of land is not owned by the Town, and the saplings were planted there with the permission of the Conservation Authority (who does own it) as they share the same desire to keep that land as pristine as the homeowners. So we did not step on anyone's "rights." It was all done with the appropriate steps taken.

There is no delineation indicating that there IS a path there. There is no gravel. No markers. No lights. There is also no reason that this strip of land should be used as a path. Even considering it to be "public property" should not negate the fact that people should still respect it (ie. pick up garbage, dog poop, etc.) People are using it either out of ignorance of the situation or assumption that there is a path under the snow (which I can understand). That is the reason that I made this post - so that everyone knows that there is NOT a path there.

I do understand your concern/ argument, however I find it disturbing that fellow members of our community would rather fight about unnecessarily using a piece of land for a purpose that will eventually create an eyesore and destroy the natural area, rather than fight to keep this part of our community beautiful - which is for the greater good of the community. As I said, there is no logical reason that this area should be walked on.

All I am asking (and I trust others will back me up) is that our fellow neighbours and community members respect the nature within our community and use the paths that have been constructed for us - not create our own.
__________________
Ian, Amanda, Autumn, & Declan
Lot 158, Wheler's Mill
Farnham B
Moved In!

Last edited by Ian and Amanda; 2008-02-25 at 04:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 2008-02-25, 03:34 PM
Ian and Amanda Ian and Amanda is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 171
Default

Really, I'm not wanting to get into petty disputes. It is not what I moved to this area for. I am not a confrontational person. I just want people to realize the impact that they are unnecessarily having on not only the homeowners in the area, but more importantly on the nature that inhabits this space.
__________________
Ian, Amanda, Autumn, & Declan
Lot 158, Wheler's Mill
Farnham B
Moved In!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 2008-02-25, 04:42 PM
TomC TomC is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 256
Default

I think Mattamy has learned from these past disputes. In the agreements for Phase 4, they specifically state there may be a future path on the eastern boundary of the phase, and they also state which streets may be extended further south.

I have to say I feel for you in this case; if the path wasn't on the plan, then it should definitely not be put in right behind your home. Personally, if they wanted to implement a trail, I think that TRCB/Mattamy should have planted a buffer region between you and the proposed trail and put the trail further away. That way, everyone would win - the residents get a trail, and you get your privacy without compromising the privacy you paid for..

But then again, if my memory serves me, a Rouge tributary does flow through that land (I guess that explains the name of your street!), so maybe that wasn't an option..

TomC
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 2008-02-28, 04:38 PM
kea66 kea66 is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Stouffville
Posts: 167
Default

guitly as charged! We have been known to take a stroll in that area not really knowing who owned it, what it was going to be used for etc. I will definitely not use it again out of respect for those homeowners who we know. However I wonder how you can enforce it since the majority of people who are using that space I'm sure are not on this forum? Can you request a sign be put there? A fence? It is a large area and is inviting for walkers of kids and dogs! Sorry Amanda..you won't see us there again (although i think we've only done it a couple times)
__________________
Karen
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 2008-02-29, 08:53 AM
MaxJay MaxJay is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 343
Default

I'm sorry.

I still fail to see what there is to be enforced. This land does not belong to any one individual! People may have paid extra cash to back onto that type of land but it does not mean that it has to be devoid of people, dog's etc.

Quote:
"I just want people to realize the impact that they are unnecessarily having on not only the homeowners in the area, but more importantly on the nature that inhabits this space."
Quote:
All I am asking (and I trust others will back me up) is that our fellow neighbours and community members respect the nature within our community and use the paths that have been constructed for us - not create our own.
I have a lot more respect for people who just come out and say it how it is. It is my impression that this thread is more about privacy than anything to do with respecting nature and I'm not going to shy away from saying that.

It is extremely hypocritical for any of us to talk about preserving and respecting nature when we've just all purchased brand new low density housing that was built on previously undeveloped or prime farm land.

The biggest disruption to the land was the construction of the houses that back onto this land - not the people walking their dogs or hiking or the school children walking home.

I do agree that people should be using that land responsibly. There is absolutely no reason for people to leave garbage and pet feces behind and I fully agree that this is absolutely unacceptable.

Sorry, I just don't see eye to eye with you on your other points of view. I'm not looking to continue a "petty dispute" because quite frankly I don't think that this is a petty topic.

Some people feel that because they pay more money for land that they are entitled to suggest appropriate use to land adjacent to theirs and others feel differently about that. There are inherent risks in owning land and the way people use land adjacent to yours is probably one of the biggest risks in owning real-estate. If you want control of what happens with adjacent land the only solution is to buy it.

When I write my posts on this topic I'm not looking to argue. I'm just looking to provide my own point of view so that people who feel the same way aren't shamed into not enjoying their surroundings (providing they are doing it in a responsible way).

P.S. We personally have not ever used the space that is being discussed in this thread. We just don't want to be given dirty looks or have people scolding us for exploring the community that we live in when they really have absolutely no right to do so. We try to ensure that our impact is small but realize that the way we are living has had a huge impact on the environment.
__________________
Emily & Jason
Phase III Wheler's Mill
Laketon A
MOVED IN!

Last edited by MaxJay; 2008-02-29 at 09:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 2008-02-29, 10:08 AM
Ian and Amanda Ian and Amanda is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 171
Default

Kea66: Thanks Karen! I really do appreciate your understanding!

Max Jay:
Hmmm.....I appreciate that you have just publicly stated your lack of respect for someone and for a situation that you know nothing about! It's amazing to me how a simple request to respect the environment and your fellow community members poses such a problem in your eyes, and ultimately brings you down to humiliating people that also express their concerns.

You know nothing about me, nor my thinking on the topic. I am not a confrontational not vindictive person. I am actually a very kind and quiet individual. In actuality, my issue IS with the impact on the environment - not with trying to dictate what land should be used for. Should there have been an actual path constructed there I could understand where you are coming from. However, there is NOT a path there - there is however flowers, grass, plants, trees, birds, animals, etc that continue to be damaged/destroyed by people using this strip of land for a purpose other than what it is intended for.

I don't understand your issue with using the paths that were constructed for you to "explore" your community, instead of walking on areas that were intended to continue to grow and beautify our area.

Housing development is inevitable, and we have all purchased a home that was built on farmland. This, however, does not mean that we have the right to continue to destroy the land that has been left undeveloped for specific reasons.

I am done having this discussion with you MaxJay. But, it amazes me the fight you are putting up for no apparent reason. I am not asking for a change in land useage/designation, nor trying to enforce how that land is being used - just for people to be aware and respectful. I would have thought that being respectful to our environment and our fellow neighbours was a reasonable request. Apparently I was sadly mistaken in this case.

Do what you need to do to "explore" your community, but please be aware of the impact that you will be having.
__________________
Ian, Amanda, Autumn, & Declan
Lot 158, Wheler's Mill
Farnham B
Moved In!

Last edited by Ian and Amanda; 2008-02-29 at 10:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Police on Little Rouge?? cbmcneil Stouffville - Mattamy On Main and Wheler’S Mill 11 2008-03-30 04:52 AM
Side-by-side fridge or bottom-freezer fridge? Nanners Appliances and Furniture 21 2007-11-27 10:28 AM
Cornell Rouge Ghetto_mathie Markham / Thornhill / Vaughan 0 2007-10-24 09:43 AM
Latest pictures of the north side of Walt Rowdyruffboy Stouffville - Mattamy On Main and Wheler’S Mill 26 2006-06-30 05:54 AM
wheler's little rouge circle.... gizmo Stouffville - Mattamy On Main and Wheler’S Mill 18 2005-08-30 08:28 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:17 AM.



Copyright © PHAND Corporation
This document may not be used elsewhere without the expressed written consent of PHAND Corporation.
*** There is no association between this website and any builder. ***

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.