Bridge improves traffic andjackson Park

Re “Parkway’s re-emergence is a step backward” (Point of View, July 3) –

It is disgusting the only daily newspaper in Peterborough continues to abuse their editorial privilege by trying to influence public opinion regarding the Parkway. Recent newspaper comments would leave a person thinking the editor did not attend the public information meeting on June 27. It is disappointing more council members did not attend. AECOM did an excellent job of investigating alternatives and gave a fairly detailed explanation of their decision making process.

While viewing the display boards the large majority of comments were in favour of the Parkway/Bridge option. Why not get all the facts before commenting? Why ask council their voting intent prior to receiving the final AECOM report? Why not more balanced editorials?

In the 2003 referendum, voters voted “NO”, to the “Partial Parkway” using the Parkhill/Fairbairn option, so why are we considering it now? Voters have never had the opportunity to vote on the original Parkway.

Embarrassed, council then tried to remove the Parkway from the Official Plan. They were advised, if this decision were appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, they would likely be required to provide an acceptable replacement. Apparently, afraid of the outcome, the issue was dropped.

The long overdue Environmental Assessment for the “Parkway Corridor”, and suggested alternatives, is being completed by AECOM. The well documented, “preferred option recommended the Official Plan version of the Parkway Corridor, including a bridge over Jackson Park. The Parkhill/Fairbairn version would probably require an Official Plan amendment.

The “original Parkway” did not disappear, so how can it re-emerge? (It only crosses a small area at the north-west cor- ner of the original Jackson Park.) Rather than a step backward, as suggested by the Examiner, it is a giant step forward. It provides opportunity to make major improvements to Jackson Park, without limiting present uses, and making it more accessible and user friendly. Just imagine a road from Parkhill to Cumberland with no driveways!

In the long term, the value of AECOM’S recommended Parkway will be multi-millions more than alternatives. So we have a win-win situation, including a sensible long term transportation plan. Are a few trees more important than 29 homes plus unsustainable traffic volumes on Parkhill/Fairbairn? AECOM is restricted to the Parkway Corridor, so what are the

new alternatives? BILLBOLTON

Bankside Dr.