PAGE 6, WHITrBY FREE PRESS, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 1988 e VOICE 0F THE COUNTY TOWN F e ~ww Published every Wednesday By 677209 Ontario nc. Phone: 668-6111 Doug Anderson Publisher The Free Press Building 131 Brock Street North, P.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. Maurîce Pither Maurice Pifher Editor Peter Irvine Advertising Manager Alexandra Simon Production Manager Mike Carrol Circulation Manager The only Whitby newspaper independently owned and operated by Whitby residents for Whitby residents. Whitby Mayor Bob Attersley's comment Monday night that the Town wants to designatea strip of open space. for parkland ail along, Lake Ontario cornes as encouraging news for the future development of Whitby. While the harbor area will be the focus of park planning and recreational activity, it's prudent to extend that open space in a band along the waterfront and protect that band from housing and industry that is reaching into south Whitby. In some cases, residential development in other parts of Whitby leaves too little room for such valuable open space, Park promotion as "parkland dedication" becomes a point of negotiation between Town and developers, rather than the valued resource that merits more attention. Again during discussion Monday night, a Thickson Point resident stated, quite accurately we think, that inadequate parkland was a shortcoming of deVelopment in Whitby. With studies and reports that constantly analyze and measure building actîvity of ail types, is there room for an assessment of where, and how much area should be left for non-building? The harbor area represents the point of departure for an effort to preserve open space and promote its recreational advantages, and Town efforts to extend it along the shoreline in Whitby - and expand park space in other parts of town where residential growth will continue - should be supported. LETTERS FROM OUR READERS Opposed to tritium transportation by Hydro To the editor: Copy of letter to Ontario riding MP Scott Fennell. Re: Transport of Radioactive Materials. Dear Mr. Fennell: I write to express my abhorrence at the plans to truck deadly tritium from the Bruce and Pickering Nuclear Facilities to the Darlington Plant, through densely populated areas ofurbanandruralontario. I am sure you are aware that one billionth of a gram of tritium can cause cancer and consequent death. Perhaps you also know that in the most recent year for which records are available (1985), 10 per cent of all trailer trucks in Ontario was in- volved in an accident. As a first step towards a com- prehensive policy for the safe disposal of nuclear materials, surely you must agree that: a) We must not allow it to be processed for sale to countries that may (without our knowledge or con- trol) use it for the manufacture and further proliferation of ther- monuclear weapons. And... b) That we must prevent this horrendously dangerous substance from being carried through our towns and hamlets, our farmlands, our playgrounds and sehool yards. Also, am I correct in thinking that all three major parties have agreed to a halt in the construction of nuclear facilities until the question of the disposal of nuclear waste has received further consideration? If so, why is construction on the Darlington nuclear site still proceeding? Mr. Fennell, I have asked you in the past if you could give me straight (non-partisan, non- electioneering, non-political) an- swers to direct questions. Now I ask again, and these are the questions: i) Do you completely discount the dangers attendant upon the tran- sportation and storage of nuclear wastes and other radioactive materials? ii) If not? do you believe that the precautions in place are sufficient, despite the overwhelming world- wide evidence that they are not (I am very willing to provide whatever statistical evidence you may required). iii) And are you therefore certain in mind, moral judgment, and ethical determination that the tran- sport of tritium (for instance) presents little or no danger to the health and genetic structure of our- selves, our children, and the generations to follow? The people of Ontario would like a genuine reply, Mr. Fennell (as- distinct from party policy statemen- ts or childish excerpts from Han- sard). If the fate of our children means nothing to you, you might consider that this is an election issue, and one that is not to be dismissed lightly. I look forward to hearing from you on this matter. Yours truly, Jeremy Hole R.R.1, Locust Hill Farmer should have right to sever To the editor: Re: Farmers' Retirement Lots As a member of Durham Region's planning committee, I am very con- cerned with the number of points of change suggested by staff in the Of- ficial Plan review. Firstly, a suggestion that we discontinue all farmers' retirement lots and all in- inter-family severance lots. Secon- dly, I am very concerned with the objective of keeping a price of far- mland artificially low by use of the Official Plan. The end result in this tactic is to give the small farmers a small return on his farm when he sells. It also means the large cor- porations are able to buy up the small farms at a cheap price. These two points alone stand out as glaring examples of the mistreatment of the small farmer who in many cases has lived on that farm for generations. It also exem- plifies the manner in which we are using and abusing our authority in the Official Plan for the benefit of wealthy corporations. For over 50 years farmers have expected and looked forward to this right as part of their retirement pension or sustenance. If this plan is approved it will reflect once more on the fact that governments and big business are working hand-in-hand against ordinary working people and now against ordinary farming people. This would be extremely harsh treatment. It has been a belief for many decades that a farmer owns his own land. It has been also a belief that he has the right to a severance of a lot SEE PAGE 9 To the editor: Perhaps you can tell me why the Renascent Foundation' has not in- formed the residents of Brooklin that they now officially own the Carnwith mansion? The deal was closed early in Mar- ch and yet there has not been a sold sign posted over the 'For Sale' signs. Is this the "good community relations" that the Renascent boasted about at their meeting in the Brooklin Community Centre a few months ago? And what else is going on behind our backs? The Renascent Foundation said that they would fight to change our lodging house bylaw so that they could accommodate more than 10 persons in their treatment centre. Is that why they are being sneaky and keeping such a low profile? Or is it because they want to apply for all the necessary permits without worrying about input from the con- cernedneighbors? At least they could put the 'Sold' sign up to stop the constant flow of traffic stopping by to view the property that is'For Sale.' It seems to me that the Renascent Foundation doesn't care about our village at all. They are only concer- ned with obtaining their house, set- ting up shop and letting the long time residents suffer the con- sequences without any warning or chance to query the permits. Please let the residents of Brooklin know that the house has been sold, to the Renascent Foundation, whether we like it or not. Our only hope now is that our Town council will hold their ground and protect our current bylaws for us. Sincerely, A.L. Loch R.R. 2, Brooklin er p Where is 'Sold' sign? LETTERS 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 name, address and phone number 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 all letters. Send to: The Editor, Whitby Free Press, Box 206, Whitby, Ontario LiN 5S1 or drop through our mailslot at 131 Brock St. N. 1%