Why ?
Why is it that, when a person expresses an opinion regarding the destruction of a beautiful, existing, public marina to make way for a non nautical amusement park and private buildings that could have been located on undeveloped nearby land, they are labeled as “naysayers” and “progress haters” ?
Who has ever said that we want the many miles of lakeshore to be left as it is?
Who has ever said that condos wouldn't be welcome near the existing marina?
Who has ever said that a skateboard facility should never be built in this city?
Who has ever said that a splashpad should never be built in this city?
Who has ever said that art work should never adorne this city?
Who has ever said that a lakeshore walk should never be built?
I personally have never heard any of these objections.
All we have ever said is that there are other places in our city that would be better suited for these facilities.
Why couldn't the people that were are all in favour without questions of "Lynn's Landing" which eliminates the existing marina, understand that there was enough other land for all of these proposed projects?
The skateboard facility for instance could have been built on one of several locations and still have been very popular, maybe even more so.
On a recent trip to London, I visited a new $500,000 skateboard park which is located in a residential area that has only a small creek nearby. It was being very well utilized by a diverse age group of boarders that had safe, easy access to it.
Shouldn't responsible civic progress build on successful existing features that have defined what a beautiful city is?
Shouldn't the visionaries of this proposal have realized the importance of the beauty of the boats and designed the project around our existing marina ?
Ron Limbrick
