Midland Today welcomes letters to the editor. They can be sent to [email protected]. Please include your daytime phone number and address (for verification of authorship, not publication).
This is in response to the article 'Vindin Street development draws public concerns and support' that was posted Saturday, October 9.
So if I understand this well, the development company hired a biologist to do a full environmental impact study on the site. They found the wetlands on the site were not provincially significant wetlands.
I hope the town does its homework and gets the opinion of more than one source. It is in the developer’s interest to have those wetlands considered not significant. But they are significant to the wildlife and to our town. Let’s not forget that developers are looking out for themselves first.
In 2006, the SSEA (Severn Sound Environmental Association) decided to leave that portion out of their evaluation because of development potential. That is not an excuse to omit evaluating that portion and it makes me just wonder about their mission and role all together. The one thing Midland really needs right now is a Conservation Authority like they have in many other municipalities.
As for the Vindin proprosal, it might be a good idea to reconsider the number of new residential dwellings because 453 does seem like quite a huge number.
I understand there are development opportunities, but not at any cost (the same for the development of Midland Bay Landing).
Also, it's important to keep in mind that most developers aren't based locally and might not have ties to the town. They don't know what's best for Midland.
Let’s get this right. It seems there is a trend going on in Midland about getting bigger. Officials must look at long-term effects. Sometimes, bigger doesn’t mean better.
L. Turcotte
Midland
