The Jewish Chronicle - - Comment&analysis -

The two ar­ti­cles on the Cam­bridge mikveh ( JC, Septem­ber 19) leave a num­ber of points need­ing clar­i­fi­ca­tion. Firstly the Cam­bridge com­mu­nity does not want Mr Gilin­sky to build a mikveh at Milton Road, but prefers the Chabad pro­posal. Far from the idyl­lic sit­u­a­tion painted by Prof Al­der­man, Milton Road is a ma­jor route for cars and buses and the only avail­able street park­ing is in neigh­bour­ing side streets some dis­tance away, which could even be­come re­stricted in the fu­ture.

Se­condly, the Chabad house is not in the cen­tre of town, as al­leged, but on the fringes of the cen­tre. It also has the ad­van­tage that the County Coun­cil car park is across the road and is avail­able for free park­ing ev­ery evening. As Mr Gilin­sky him­self ar­gued when he wished the mikveh to be built in Thomp­son’s Lane, the mikveh needs to be near the cen­tre of town as many of the po­ten­tial cus­tomers would need to walk there.

Fi­nally, as an ob­server of this af­fair, and a trus­tee of the Or­tho­dox Con­gre­ga­tion, it ap­pears to me that it is not Chabad who are ob­struct­ing the build­ing of the mikveh, but the Gilin­skys. Af­ter all, the CCMCT trustees have re­peat­edly voted against giv­ing the funds to the Gilin­skys and it is time the Gilin­skys co­op­er­ated in build­ing the mikveh on a cen­tral, well known, and eas­ily ac­ces­si­ble site. Barry Landy Gil­bert Road, Cam­bridge

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.