Losing a golf course, not a green space

Re: Stittsville, a golf course and a ‘tragedy of the commons’, Oct. 29. I read with interest Barbara Robson’s article on the potential fate of the Amberwood Village Golf and Country Club and I have to take issue with a number of points.

I do not believe we will lose our green space if the club closes.

The golf course includes the Pool Creek waterway, which flows right through Stittsville. As such, this land cannot be developed for housing, but could make a lovely extension of the Pool Creek pathway, which leads toward and out of Amberwood. This would mean that the green space could be used by all members of the community and beyond rather than just those who pay for a golf membership. Sixty per cent of the golf members come from outside Amberwood and, of the remaining 40 per cent, most are residents of the retirement condos on the north side of the golf course. However, we are being threatened with falling house prices or an imposed levy to support an institution which is only used by part of the community.

I think a Pool Creek pathway, or Amberwood Commons if you like, would not at all be detrimental to our house prices and would more fully utilize the property and facilities, owned by the Amberwood Village Recreational Association and not the golf club. In its headlong rush to save the golf club, the association’s executive has not looked at all of the options for utilization of the green space.

Michael Price, Stittsville