Letters to the editor: The real motivation for building in Bath Street, Toronto

LOCATION, LOCATION: A reader contends this waterfront land in Bath Street, Toronto, is the wrong spot for council's planned multi-storey development. Picture: David Stewart
LOCATION, LOCATION: A reader contends this waterfront land in Bath Street, Toronto, is the wrong spot for council's planned multi-storey development. Picture: David Stewart

Bath Street motivation

IN response to Carl Stevenson's letter ("Bath Street prudent", Lakes Mail, May 16), please don't be fooled. Council's motivation is perceived financial gain for its property and business development department at the expense of reduced public-use foreshore land.

From the little we know and, in spite of its own planning instruments, council's proposal is primarily for a non-compliant six-storey residential and tourist unit complex. And because council insists on not including this land in its Foreshore Master Plan, the community has no say in the process, until it's too late. Council knows there are other blocks of land in Toronto that it could build on more appropriately.

It's not good to see a council spend ratepayers' money on a $25-million proposal that most people do not want.

- Nico Marcar, Carey Bay

What would Abe think?

LAKE Macquarie City Council is now clearly aware of the overwhelming opposition to its plan to put high-rise development on the foreshore parkland in Bath Street, Toronto.

Unfortunately for our community council has ignored community meetings, petitions, letters, historical evidence of the purpose of this site, and the environmental impact on our lake. We are constantly berated for "opposing change".

To wax historical, and perhaps lyrical, Abraham Lincoln stated in the Gettysburg Address in 1863: "that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from this earth". High minded indeed.

Today, even in local government, it seems we have government of the disappointed and disenchanted, by the politically ambitious, for the property developers and speculators.

- Kate Elderton, Toronto

Snooze League

ANYONE suffering from insomnia should have watched the A-League grand final on Sunday night: nil-all after 120 minutes? Wow wee. How exciting, not.

- Matt Ophir, Charlestown

Location the issue

I THINK Carl Stevenson ("Bath Street prudent", Lakes Mail, May 16) has missed the point in his letter about council's proposed development in Bath Street, Toronto. The objection is not about development per se, but about the location. Social and environmental wellbeing is at risk from a development that council cannot and will not try to justify except in dollar terms.

One storey or six, Toronto's waterfront parkland will be truncated and there is little enough of it there, especially as the population grows. Of course, allowing a high-rise development will also set a precedent that could well see our lake surrounded by high-rise on the shoreline.

- Lois Simpson, Toronto

Ethics predates Bible

IN response to Barbara Dufty ("Ethics have Christian basis", Lakes Mail, May 9) I would like to point out that virtue ethics was fathered by Socrates as a branch of philosophy in ancient Greece some eight hundred years before the collation of the Christian Bible.

Various scripture providers have stated publicly their desire to "transform this nation for God", described public school students as "a mission field ripe for the harvest", and urged their personnel to "go forth and make disciples of them".

It is clear that the current primary purpose of scripture classes is not to instil values in our children.

Also, segregating children according to their parents' religion is no foundation for developing tolerance.

These are just some of the reasons why the NSW Teachers Federation and NSW P&C Federation are opposed to scripture being held during class time in public schools.

- Paul Foster, Sunshine

Recent letters

Comments