Respect for our Village Heritage

We have owned our home in Bayfield for 12 years and made it our primary residence 5 years ago. I'm an active volunteer with several groups in the village and have gained a great deal through my involvement.

I don't feel that we need sidewalks throughout the village residential streets, but do feel that sidewalks would be a big improvement on the Main Street. I'm in favour of pavestone walkways similar to the section outside the Archives and Library buildings. The other walkways in the village become a muddy mess when it rains or the snow thaws.

I'm not opposed to growth and development in our community, but it needs to be managed very carefully such that the heritage buildings in our village are protected. Residential development needs to be in keeping with the look and feel of our community. For example, variances for "container" buildings should not be considered. The current sewage treatment facility capacity is also a limiting factor for development. With the new Tim Hortons/gas bar recently opened on Hwy 21 comes the concern that this may lead to other commercial developments along the same stretch that would present unfair competition to the current businesses in the village.

I've read other responses about the need for a dog park. While I don't disagree with this idea in general, I do disagree with locating it in the middle of a residential area. The reasons why Council denied a request 6 years ago to locate an off-leash park within the ball field area of the Ag Society grounds have not changed, nor have the surrounding residents' reasons for opposing it. Another responder mentioned the Varna complex just behind the first row of trees. This is an excellent choice for more than one reason - it's non-residential, it offers ample paved parking, a level surface, a water source, and it's next to the trail system.

I look forward to participating further as this planning tool moves forward.