Some are trying to have us believe that the proponent’s self-serving offer of “saving” Margaret Burgess Park during their proposed construction would be in the community’s interest. Let’s look at the big picture and the facts (for a larger view, click on the photographs).
Above we see the current view from Margaret Burgess Park – people visit to see the trees and the rocks and the water.
But the first step of the proponent’s planned destruction would be to cut down all the trees on Portage Landing (the Township land south of the proposed construction site). No more trees to see. This would be painful, nobody would come to Margaret Burgess Park to see that.
But it gets worse. Portage Landing would become a construction zone. There would be a huge crane, blasted rock, porta-potties, concrete forms, a huge steel sediment settling tank, fencing …
And there would be no Bala north falls. There would be a plastic and dirt cofferdam, such as this.
Perhaps the most ridiculous part of the proponent’s plan is that in addition to occupying Diver’s Point and the area beside Purk’s Place, they would want to make construction sites out of the Precambrian Shield parking lot, the Township parking lot (the south half of the Don’s Bakery parking lot), Portage Landing, and using the widened shoulder of Muskoka Road 169. Visitors couldn’t visit Margaret Burgess Park because there would be nowhere for them to park (the north part of Don’s Bakery parking lot is private property, for the retailers across the road).
So what good is keeping Margaret Burgess Park open if it is in the middle of seven construction sites, the view from it is only of cranes and cofferdams, and there’s nowhere to park anyways.