Sir: Re: Bicycle paths for Victoria Avenue.
I completely agree with the editorial, “Cycling links required,” on Dec. 20.
The ability of governments, of any kind, to find ways to spend great amounts of the taxpayer’s money and to complicate simple things never fails to amaze me!
We do not live on Victoria Avenue, we live somewhat north and east of it, but every time we have to go to the centre of town, we make a point to drive through that beautiful avenue, lined with such majestic old trees and also beautiful homes; it’s a pleasure to drive through one of the most beautiful avenues in town.
It is just incomprehensible that Chatham-Kent would choose to spend over $250,000 and change the looks of this beautiful avenue to put bicycle paths, when right there, before our eyes, there is such a simple solution to this conundrum.
There is not even a need to widen the sidewalks, there are two sidewalks on Victoria Avenue south of McNaughton Avenue. Would it not be possible to have a compromise and, by simply putting the bicycle path markers in one of those sidewalks, easily solve the whole problem?
Many will say that north and south bicycle paths would be needed, that pedestrians also need north and south paths, but is there really that great amount of both pedestrians and bicycles using Victoria Avenue that this could not be solved by just a civil compromise of pedestrians to one side, bicycles to the other? No great expenses on even engineering studies needed!
Then, in the future, when the bicycle traffic gets as congested as the automobile traffic through Victoria Avenue, we can do the engineering studies and widen the sidewalks for bicycle/pedestrian paths, but in the meantime, could we be more reasonable and just adjust and instead use that money to improve other real social problems?
Maria Logan
Chatham
