eauric Pithe Publishe d every Wednesday M EitoPir By 677209 Ontarioa mc. Eio Phone: 668-6111 Peter Irvine lA D Dou Andrson Advertising Manager Publisher. Alexandra Simon ÈThe FrePesBidn Production Manage 1r ýýC VOCE O TH COUTY OWN131 Brock Street North, The only Whitby newspaper independently owned and operated by P.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. Whithy residents for Whitby residents. The Ontario educational system has faced criticismn in the past decade, blamed for a wide range of literacy and social problems. Recently, both Durnamr school boards have addressed the current educational needs of children and youth, implementing modern and up-to-date solutions to literacy and community concerns. The Durham public school board recently Meeting the needs received a special board task force report on dropout students that addresses the causes of leaving, and gives insight into what can be done to retain more students. The Durham separate board heard a presentation from one of their own language consultants on the whole language approach to teaching language to primary grades, a system to meet the needs of a wide variety of student abilit les and-needs. Despite the financial pressures on both boards to provide more accommodation and other services to students in the region, the boards can be com- mended for continued relevant and quality curric- ulum and social programming. Opinions on Port Whitby development To the editor. I amn witing in response to your article on the Port Whitby development. I was not in favor of any high- rise buildings and I do not remember any mention of high rise in buildings in the earlier plans for the harbor. I was also very much in favor of a public walkway along the waterfront. Whitby has so much potentiai here to create a wonderful and beautiful waterfront environment for ail residents of Whitby and not just the owners of this To the editor- We strongly believe public accese to the Whitby waterfront should be retained in any redevelopment proposais. We think it je important ta have an uninterrupted pathwray along the shoreline, which would benefit the maqjority of Whitby residents, not juet a handful of pro-development public servants and pro-profit development company officiais. The harborfront should be, in development. I have travelled a good deal and have also spent considerable time at Toronto's Harbourfront and I cannot think of a beach or residential waterfront area in Toronto or other places (L.e. Florida) where public access is not allowed on the waterfront. The Harbourfront developmnent realized that high-rise was becoing an eyesore and was ruining what had made the area attractive in the first place. I believe ail high-rise construction in this area of Toronto has been Why a walkway on Broek St.? To the editor. Re: the waterfront at Port Whitby When we camne to Whitby from Europe 35 years ago, the nicest thing was the lakefront at Port VWtby. We walk there suxnmer and winter. Now it is not only going to be ruined by high-rises, townhouses, et al, but it would seem that the public is being denied access ta the waterfront. Councillor Ross Batten proposes a walkway on Brock St. S. What use is that? I might as well walk on my own street. I want to walk by the water. We do not own a cottage, so we go to 'The Port' as do a lot more people. Ites the old story, do what the developer wants for the almighty dollar and neyer mind the town residents. If I wasn't nearly a senior citizen I would get out of Whidtby, it has grown far too much. Mary MacAlpine Whitby our view, a people place. The priority shouid be the pathway along the shoreline and not the buildings. We'd accept the proposal for three buildings of 18 stonies, se the view of the lake is not obstructed as much; and more space around each building, as long as there is a considerable amount of parkland left aiong the shoreline. Yours truly, B.L.&RIL Conoerned Whitby Residents stopped and any future development planned is for low-rise. Why ie it that Whitby planners feel that they can do better? Our planners always seem eager to seil off our heritage (Lynde House to Len Oullen) and our future (Port Perry) to the highest bidder (Coscan). I was also very disappointed with the performance of niy representative, Lyndla Buffett. I had spoken to her about this very issue before the election and she was not in favor of high-rise development and feit the walkway should be for ail of Whitby to enjoy. I fail to see the relevance of the liability dlaim as stated by Ross To the editor. Re: Deveiopment of the Whitby Hlarbor I have great difficulty accepting the idea of developing the harbor. But certainly if there is ta be development, then the public should deflnitely have access ta the waterfront. At the present time, the lakeshore is a quiet spot where we can go to watch the passing boats, go flshing, have a picnic, relax on the sand or feed the geese and swans. I realize that Whitby is a Batten. What je the difference in liability between a waterfront walkway and one on busy Brock St.? Our Town council always seems to succumnb to developers' blackmail. Council has to do thinge their way or no deal. Wake up, councillors and planner£,. These developers make tremendous profits off' your. decisions. It's time you told them to do it your way! Otherwise you are selling us ail out. Also, I see no mention of echools for this area. If these are farnily units, then we are talking of adding thousands of children to our aiready crowded school system. If there are 1,000 units growing commumity and "éprogress" je the key word used in ail arguments for development projecte. But the peacefulness and natural conditions of our environment are just as important as condos and townhouses - especially at the waterfront. Cleaning up the natural environinent and making the waterfront more attractive is certainly something that would enhance our lovely town. However, the concept of 15-story buildings, 230 townhouses and a recreational centre is totally with one or two children pet farnfly, this ie extremely high density in an area where there je no provision for these children. t have lived in Whitby for, 16 years and hope that our Town will use some foresight in decisions for the good of ail the residents. We should be thinking of utilizing this natural phenomenon of lake frontage to our advantage with walkways and bicycle paths and flot limiting its access to a chosen few. Corne on, WVhitby council., let's use a littie imagination and not always take the safe route. Yours truly, Sharon Heinrich Whitby .:epulsive. We do not need a "Harborfront" like Toronto. We should keep the area as naturai and dlean as possible. Why je it that "growth" and "progress" are synonymous with "cernent" and "steel" - with destroying nature? I reaiize people need attractive homes and recreationai areas but they do not need ta be erected at the waterfront. I think our Town council should think again. Sincerely, Helen Clarke Resident of Whitby- 18 years W e don't need a 'Harhourfront' Keep access LETTERS1 The Whitby Free Press welcomes letters to the Editor on any subject of concern to our readers. Letters should be brief and to the point - rarely more than 300 words. All letters must be accompanied by the namne, address and phone numnber of the writer; however, on request, your name may be withheld from publication if we agree that there is a valid reason. The paper reserves the right to reject or edit ail letters. Send to: The Editor, Whitby Free Press, Box 206, Whitby, Ontario LiN 5S1 or drop through our mailsiot at 131 Brock St. N.