Dear editor:

Along with other residents, particularly those like myself whose property backs on to the old railway and the Upper Canada Heritage Trail, I have followed the recent discussion among readers and my neighbours with great interest, “Residents angry after healthy trees cut down along heritage trail,” The Lake Report, Sept. 10.

Whilst the objectives of the heritage committee are noble, the outcome in respect of the “trail” running between King and Paffard streets is to say the least disappointing; where there was a trail in the true sense (a rough path in a wooded area), we now sadly have a road together with ebikes riding three abreast, increased numbers of cyclists, tourists and accompanying noise for residents enjoying the comfort of their patios.

We also have increased exposure from a security angle, with easier access for those wishing to break in to the properties backing onto the “trail.”

Forgive me for using the term “trail” as according to the heritage committee it is actually a walkway and subject to width requirements per section 3.13 of the municipal engineering standards.

According to the same standard, the walkway should also have a fence each side? Please say no to that. Many residents are not happy, not least because we weren’t consulted prior to the carnage being done.

To those residents about to be the subject of phase two of the “trail's” development, I hope your concerns are heard and the road, sorry walkway, is not further extended, eroding your peaceful relationship with nature.

Peter Warrack
NOTL