Skip to content
  1. Home
  2. Letters to the Editor

LETTER: Council plan will 'change neighbourhoods forever'

Resident wants council to stop thinking about developers and show more concern for residents, urges people to attend tonight's public forum
Letter to the Editor
2024-09-09-bt-ltte-3
This image is taken from the town’s website. The picture is not a fourplex, laments reader. She says it’s a triplex with an ADU in the backyard. Image supplied by Helen Crocker

BradfordToday welcomes letters to the editor at [email protected] or via the website. Please include your full name, daytime phone number and address (for verification of authorship, not publication). This letter is in response to an article titled 'Time to chime in on more rentals, fourplexes in Bradford,' published Sept. 9.

(Tonight) the town is having a public meeting at the Zima Room at our library at 7 p.m.

This will be one of the most significant public meetings because what the town is proposing will change our neighbourhoods forever. Council needs to hear our thoughts before they make their decision. They are counting on the residents of Bradford to give them direction. Once this is done it is done, so make your voice heard. 

On Feb. 20, staff presented a report for allowing two units and main dwelling on one residential lot (meeting provincial requirements). Council approved the report. 

However, at the April 2 council meeting a report was presented to council to consider fourplexes (as one of several options). Council voted in favour of the proposal with the exception of Coun. Giordano. He voted against it. Thank you sir.

In the report CAO 22024-4 it states: “A fourplex is a multi-dwelling unit that typically houses four separate units under one roof. The image (above) is taken from the town’s website. The picture is not a fourplex. It’s a triplex with an additional dwelling unit (ADU) in the backyard. 

Notice in the definition, it says “a building,“ not two separate buildings. Is the town trying to rewrite the definition of a fourplex? On the ADU website and the Zoning Byaw Amendment draft (which is a legal document) one word is missing: fourplex. 

ADUs are an expensive investment and only a few homeowners may even consider them as an option because the cost will exceed the benefits. However if a builder/developer wants to build an ADUs at the same time as a building, well there is little cost involved. Who benefits from this false proposal? Not the residents.

What will happen in the future when the town, in fact, introduces fourplexes into our communities? Especially Wards 2, 6 and 7, close to the GO train? Developers/builders will have the opportunity to over-develop our neighbourhoods. Will both scenarios apply to our neighbourhoods? A fourplex as well as a triplex with an ADU in the backyard? 

Coun. Harper, Dykie and Scott: these are your residents. Do you think this is acceptable? Coun. Scott at the April 2 meeting you encouraged councillors to vote for the report as it had the potential to help the town to be considered for federal funding.

If the town needed fourplexes why didn’t they just include fourplexes as stated in the report?

What is driving the fourplex request? Acquiring federal funding and housing numbers. Since the town isn’t meeting its housing numbers (29 per cent and the province's target is 80 per cent) it’s clear the town is trying to find resourceful ways to create more housing. Unfortunately, at the expense of the local residents.

Why wards 2, 6,7? 

  • proximity to GO station
  • lots are wider 
  • homes are small (demolition not expensive) 
  • one lot can be severed creating two lots 
  • two triplexes plus two ADU in  backyard 

Now you have eight units where you had one lot. 

How will this impact local residents? 

This false proposal will allow for greater intensification than even a fourplex. Shame on the town for even suggesting this proposal. Mayor Leduc your residents voted for you to represent us, not chase numbers and benefit builders. 

Council please consider:

  1. Remove the proposal for fourplexes from the discussion as this process has been misrepresented. 
  2. Go back to the February plan and meet the provincial requirements. Two ADUs plus the main dwelling. 
  3. Have a discussion regarding the size of an ADU that is acceptable to residents. 
  4. Have strict bylaws included in the Zoning By-Law Amendment 

Let’s make this a focused discussion of the best way to service the residents will meeting the provincial requirements. 

Please come out tonight to the Zima room at 7 p.m. 

Helen Crocker,
Bradford, Ont.