Skip to content

LETTERS: 'We need alternatives,' say letter writers of Terminals Point plan

The plan for the public lands is 'excellent,' paying for it with a condo tower is not, says letter writer
USED 20220930_GMC_EE1
Collingwood Terminals building just before sunset.

CollingwoodToday welcomes letters to the editor at [email protected] or via the website. Please include your full name, daytime phone number and address (for verification of authorship, not publication).The following letters were sent in response to the proposed development of the Collingwood Terminals site.

I attended the presentation on Nov. 27 describing the public lands portion of the Terminals Point project. The plan is excellent.

Sadly, we are told that to finance it we have to accept a completely inappropriate, massive, private development of multi-million dollar condominiums.

I further learned that the hotel and restaurant will be on a 99-year lease from the Town of Collingwood who will still own the property. It seems like a huge and potentially risky liability for the town to assume as a landlord.

I look forward to the public consultation for the Terminals Point buildings next spring to shed more light on how these issues will be addressed. We need alternative solutions to what's being proposed.

Anne Brayley 
Collingwood, Ont
 

*****

After reading the numerous replies from Rino Stradiotto's letter, I am in agreement.

Collingwood is not Toronto and does not require a 24-storey condominium at our water's edge.

We can barely see our beautiful Georgian Bay with the new developments that are presently underway.

Clean up the terminals, with perhaps a less predominant project proposal.

Collingwood cannot support the infrastructure required for the increased traffic the Terminals Point project will cause.

We are a small town, with an amazing waterfront and a backdrop of the Blue Mountains. Please leave us beautiful.

Heather Larke
Collingwood, Ont.

*****

Whatever happened to the Collingwood height bylaw? 
 
There was considerable public pushback following the construction of the eight-storey Ruperts Landing tower. 
 
As I recall, the council at that time listened to resident concerns and implemented a height bylaw so that nothing that tall would be built in the future.
 
The sentiment expressed in recent letters is spot on! How can this council now be endorsing a building that is three times the height of the Ruperts' tower?
 

Jim Higgins
Collingwood, Ont.