• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Steve
    July 02, 2010 - 13:33

    I believe NLHC should have done a better job in communicating on this, but even if they had, there still would have been strong opposition, based on the meeting turnout. What a close-minded bunch in Mount Pearl. The increased density is negligible. The neighbours are prejudiced against low income people. NLHC owns this house. It was built for a time when people had large families. Now that's not the case, and their clients are often single people or couples, and they need to meet that need. Where is the generosity of spirit in Mount Pearl? Very sad.

  • Signs of Salem
    July 02, 2010 - 13:31

    And Mt Pearl calls itself a VIBRANT and PROGRESSIVE community...What a joke. Apparently it's not INCLUSIVE either. Come live in Mt. Pearl ... it's a great place to live, to work --- but wait, you're only welcome as long as you meet the city's social standards. Seems to me that someone took it upon themselves to rally the masses to the witch burning. Maybe the sign to their City should say WELCOME TO SALEM - MESS WITH US AND YOU MIGHT GET BURNED

  • Cheerbear
    July 02, 2010 - 13:30

    There are too many family homes and not enough for singles/couples.

  • Saucy Face
    July 02, 2010 - 13:23

    Imagine the state Mt. Pearl would be in if they had a major issue to deal with.
    It's time Randy for you and the rest of you bedroom council to pull up your underoos and deal with this grown up problem.

  • Nasty
    July 02, 2010 - 13:21

    NIMBY. Too good for ya is it? Suck it up. This is still Kanada and to be a part of it you need to accept all people. Otherwise we have flights leaving for North Korea or China daily that I am sure you could get a seat sale on.

  • janet
    July 02, 2010 - 13:21

    i am a single person living in a basemen t apartment in mt pearl, i have been dealing with[SLUM LANDLORDS[ since moving in here nearly 3 years ago, i would welcome a nice housing unit and be able to reside in mt pearl wher ei grew up since the age of 3 years old, i am paying through the nose for a roof over my head and have to pay all utilies myself, while living way below poverty level.

  • Political Watcher
    July 02, 2010 - 13:20

    I can't believe it; a full meting and public session and not a word from Paula all things development Tessier.
    This is just another case of the arrogance of Mount Pearl Council, expecting the residents to believ whatever they say.
    In the bigger scheme of things, this is a minor isue and yet again shows that Mount Pearl Council has very little to do but sit around once a week and justify a meal.

  • Isabelle
    July 02, 2010 - 13:19

    When my sons was looking for an apartment in St. John's it was near impossible but there were plenty in Mount Pearl, reasonable rent too as compared to St. John's....

    There is a need for smaller units ...if you got two or more children it means they share a room!!! Hey I grew up in a house and never had a room of my own until I bought my own house. Shared a three bedroom home with eight people and five were adults.

    I know a family on social assitance and they have a three bedroom home from housing and they have their own room and their two grown unemployed adult daughters each have their own room. Complete with computers, televisions and internet.

  • Landlord in Mount Pearl
    July 02, 2010 - 13:17

    To janet parsons:

    Just wondering, how much are you paying a month for rent? Also, it's pretty standard for tenants to pay all utilities themselves. If the place you are staying is so bad, why don't you leave? After 3 years, I'm sure you would have been able to find suitable housing for yourself in that time.

  • Neighbor
    July 02, 2010 - 13:17

    As a concerned citizen in Mount Pearl, I also have some concerners with the Spruce Avenue Developement. Some of the readers may not realize that there is only 2 vacant units out of the 20 NLHC units on Spruce, the reason they are vacant is due to the amount of mold and rotting windows and siding, most of the units already house families of 3, 4, and 5 residents. they are being used for exactly what they were intended to be, family units. With the exception of 2 homes on the street, it is a very quiet neighborhood.
    A note for Janet Parsons, these homes are in desparate need of repairs, some people are cleaning mold off their windows and exterior walls on a daily basis, they have the old tiles on the floors that you would see in schools, they are drafty from rotting windows and doors, so I guess NLHC should be considerded a slum landlord also.
    It might be time for NLHC to pull up their socks, and develope a level of standard for these low income families to live in, starting with making the houses they rent at lest healthy, some of the children living in these homes have special needs, allergies, and constant sinus and lung infections. And second NLHC should put in place a policy to screen their tennents, a clear letter of conduct from the RNC for all adults living in the units would certainly make the neighbourhood safe for everyone in the area.

  • Renter
    July 02, 2010 - 13:12

    Only in Newfoundland do you see the POU thing as much. Other areas seem a little more progressive in this regard and include them in the rent. Too bad things have not progressed here and greed reigns over all.

  • Steve
    July 01, 2010 - 20:22

    I believe NLHC should have done a better job in communicating on this, but even if they had, there still would have been strong opposition, based on the meeting turnout. What a close-minded bunch in Mount Pearl. The increased density is negligible. The neighbours are prejudiced against low income people. NLHC owns this house. It was built for a time when people had large families. Now that's not the case, and their clients are often single people or couples, and they need to meet that need. Where is the generosity of spirit in Mount Pearl? Very sad.

  • Signs of Salem
    July 01, 2010 - 20:19

    And Mt Pearl calls itself a VIBRANT and PROGRESSIVE community...What a joke. Apparently it's not INCLUSIVE either. Come live in Mt. Pearl ... it's a great place to live, to work --- but wait, you're only welcome as long as you meet the city's social standards. Seems to me that someone took it upon themselves to rally the masses to the witch burning. Maybe the sign to their City should say WELCOME TO SALEM - MESS WITH US AND YOU MIGHT GET BURNED

  • Cheerbear
    July 01, 2010 - 20:17

    There are too many family homes and not enough for singles/couples.

  • Saucy Face
    July 01, 2010 - 20:08

    Imagine the state Mt. Pearl would be in if they had a major issue to deal with.
    It's time Randy for you and the rest of you bedroom council to pull up your underoos and deal with this grown up problem.

  • Nasty
    July 01, 2010 - 20:05

    NIMBY. Too good for ya is it? Suck it up. This is still Kanada and to be a part of it you need to accept all people. Otherwise we have flights leaving for North Korea or China daily that I am sure you could get a seat sale on.

  • janet
    July 01, 2010 - 20:04

    i am a single person living in a basemen t apartment in mt pearl, i have been dealing with[SLUM LANDLORDS[ since moving in here nearly 3 years ago, i would welcome a nice housing unit and be able to reside in mt pearl wher ei grew up since the age of 3 years old, i am paying through the nose for a roof over my head and have to pay all utilies myself, while living way below poverty level.

  • Political Watcher
    July 01, 2010 - 20:02

    I can't believe it; a full meting and public session and not a word from Paula all things development Tessier.
    This is just another case of the arrogance of Mount Pearl Council, expecting the residents to believ whatever they say.
    In the bigger scheme of things, this is a minor isue and yet again shows that Mount Pearl Council has very little to do but sit around once a week and justify a meal.

  • Isabelle
    July 01, 2010 - 20:01

    When my sons was looking for an apartment in St. John's it was near impossible but there were plenty in Mount Pearl, reasonable rent too as compared to St. John's....

    There is a need for smaller units ...if you got two or more children it means they share a room!!! Hey I grew up in a house and never had a room of my own until I bought my own house. Shared a three bedroom home with eight people and five were adults.

    I know a family on social assitance and they have a three bedroom home from housing and they have their own room and their two grown unemployed adult daughters each have their own room. Complete with computers, televisions and internet.

  • Landlord in Mount Pearl
    July 01, 2010 - 19:58

    To janet parsons:

    Just wondering, how much are you paying a month for rent? Also, it's pretty standard for tenants to pay all utilities themselves. If the place you are staying is so bad, why don't you leave? After 3 years, I'm sure you would have been able to find suitable housing for yourself in that time.

  • Neighbor
    July 01, 2010 - 19:57

    As a concerned citizen in Mount Pearl, I also have some concerners with the Spruce Avenue Developement. Some of the readers may not realize that there is only 2 vacant units out of the 20 NLHC units on Spruce, the reason they are vacant is due to the amount of mold and rotting windows and siding, most of the units already house families of 3, 4, and 5 residents. they are being used for exactly what they were intended to be, family units. With the exception of 2 homes on the street, it is a very quiet neighborhood.
    A note for Janet Parsons, these homes are in desparate need of repairs, some people are cleaning mold off their windows and exterior walls on a daily basis, they have the old tiles on the floors that you would see in schools, they are drafty from rotting windows and doors, so I guess NLHC should be considerded a slum landlord also.
    It might be time for NLHC to pull up their socks, and develope a level of standard for these low income families to live in, starting with making the houses they rent at lest healthy, some of the children living in these homes have special needs, allergies, and constant sinus and lung infections. And second NLHC should put in place a policy to screen their tennents, a clear letter of conduct from the RNC for all adults living in the units would certainly make the neighbourhood safe for everyone in the area.

  • Renter
    July 01, 2010 - 19:50

    Only in Newfoundland do you see the POU thing as much. Other areas seem a little more progressive in this regard and include them in the rent. Too bad things have not progressed here and greed reigns over all.