Cutting off access is wrong

Cutting off access to Stanley Park, except for those who can walk or cycle, is very wrong-headed. This notion seems to imply that the park is there mainly for those who live in the area. All city residents pay for the park and are therefore entitled to be able to access it, despite age or physical condition.

As someone born and raised in the West End, the park was frequented by my family often. Without the ability to drive there, we would not have been able to access the park as a family — picnicking, swimming or attending Theatre Under The Stars, which we did every summer. How would parents with two or three kids get to Brockton, or Prospect Point, and Lumbermen’s Arch?

Then there is Ceperley Park, near Second Beach, where I spent many an hour playing on the swings and teeter-totters. How would a family access Second Beach to go swimming or get to the restaurant now called the Sequoia Teahouse, which is about three-quarters of the way around the park? Just getting to this place is half the fun. We always take relatives who come from abroad to the park to dine and show the city off from the perspective of Stanley Park Drive, which would be impractical if we could not use our car.

My husband and I are now senior citizens. He is 80 and I’m 73, and we would effectively be denied access to the park if we could not drive. People with health issues who may have to use a walker are as entitled as anyone else to access the park, but obviously the only practical and realistic way for people in our situation to get there is by car.

I don’t know what the problem is. As someone who has driven around the park too many times to count, I’ve never actually come across what you would call a traffic jam in the park. Stanley Park is not just there for the physically fit. Suzanne Mah, Vancouver