Monday, February 08, 2021 7:21 PM To: Pat Dunn Subject: Atvs
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Appendix: C To Report: PW2021-002 OFF ROAD VEHICILE TASK FORCE RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE From: Barbara/Harold Sent: Monday, February 08, 2021 7:21 PM To: Pat Dunn Subject: ATVs I want to add my voice to the objections to the ATV trail through town. You would know the reasons as this has been raised before. Please consider the environment and the people of Lindsay and do not proceed with this trail. Barbara From: Doug Banks [ Sent: Monday, February 08, 2021 11:13 AM To: Pat Dunn Cc: Andy Letham Subject: Atv right away through Lindsay Dear Sirs, I has come to my attention that there is a move to allow ATVs access through Lindsay. I am concerned about this from a safety, environmental and degradation of infrastructures issue. I hope that this will move will be voted down. Regards, Donna Banks On Feb 13, 2021, at 6:16 PM, Ellen Woodward wrote: In 2020 money was budgeted for an Active Transportation Plan which was badly needed. This was postponed, but it is my understanding that a request for proposal has been sent. I do not think any discussion about the use of trails should be taking place prior to the completion of this report. Both the Legacy and Rotary Trail are experiencing unusually heavy users who were formerly unaware of these trails prior to Covid. We are all aware of the increase in population due to increasing housing. There is every reason to believe that useage will continue to rise. In addition, the above trails are the only place I feel safe, since I have mobility issues. It goes without saying that the introduction of motorized vehicles defeat citizens rights to quiet enjoyment and a pollution free environment. I fail to find any justification to allow a small percentage of the population to negatively affect the environment and the majority. Ellen Woodward Page 1 of 203 Appendix: C To Report: PW2021-002 On Feb 14, 2021, at 4:39 PM, Gail Dagneault wrote: Hello Pat I just would like to add my voice to those who do not want ATV's on the Legacy Trail or other trails in town. I walk the trails and really don't have a problem with them on the outer trails - but when walking with some of my more senior friends this is not what we want in the city. Not only noisy - but a deterrent to wildlife we love to see. Thank you Gail Dagneault On Feb 14, 2021, at 8:47 AM, Jan & Chris Guillard wrote: We do not wish for any ORV/ ATV to have access to any road or street in Lindsay. There are plenty of trails presently available here for this purpose. Respectfully submitted, Jan & Chris Guillard From: Jamie Morris Sent: February 15, 2021 6:53 PM To: Pat Dunn Cc: Tracy Richardson; Kathleen Seymour-Fagan Subject: Off Road Vehicle Task Force Hello Pat, I’m writing to you in your capacity as Chair of the Off Road Vehicle Task Force and copying the two other councillor members. After watching the February 5th initial meeting of the Task Force, I have concerns I want to register. Councillors Seymour-Fagan and Richardson and Steve Lane all referred to “special interests” that might be opposed to ORVs (Off-Road Vehicles) on roads. Two questions about that: Are ORV owners not a special interest group? What “special interests” were the councillors referring to and do those interests not matter and not need to be taken into consideration, too? Councillor Seymour-Fagan talked of the need to “put a positive spin” on ORV use of roads. Why should the task force be putting ANY kind of “spin”? Should it not be looking at issues around ORV use of roads in a fair, even-handed way? Page 2 of 203 Appendix: C To Report: PW2021-002 Your Terms of Reference direct that the task force “Review and provide recommendation(s) to Council” on “restrictions or prohibitions related to the use of off road vehicles.” In the first meeting the unspoken assumption seemed to be that whether ORVs should have access to roads was a settled issue and that the task force job was to find the best linkages between trails and to set down some ground rules. Durham, Northumberland and Peterborough Counties and the municipalities of Selwyn and Cavan/Monoghan are among the jurisdictions that do NOT allow ORVs on the roads. What are their reasons for rejecting the idea? Will their reasons be discussed and given consideration? My hope is that your Task Force will consider the interests of ALL residents (not just ORV operators), will not dismiss those with concerns as nay-sayers and “special interests,” and will not begin from an assumption that ORVS should have access to roads. Regards, Jamie Morris From: Chantal Wooldridge Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 12:45 PM To: Pat Dunn; Andy Letham; Patrick O'Reilly; Tracy Richardson; Kathleen Seymour-Fagan Subject: ATVs on Legacy Trail Hi there, I'm new to the area but just moved to the Springdale Gardens neighborhood in November. I have heard through the grapevine that the city is examining the use of Lindsay trails to permit ATV use on them. Although I have not been here long, I have already used this trail often to get out and clear my head. I work from home and having this in my backyard is a big reason I selected this neighborhood to live in. Allowing off road vehicles to use this trail would have a major safety impact on all those who use it to bike, walk, run, unwind, especially children and seniors. Not to mention the noise it would cause and the potential for our house prices to be affected. Please let me know if there is a more formal way to voice my concerns Kindly, Chantal Wooldridge Page 3 of 203 Appendix: C To Report: PW2021-002 On Feb 16, 2021, at 10:06 AM, wrote: Re: An Off Road Vehicle (ORV) Task Force has been formed by the City of Kawartha Lakes to determine which of Lindsay's Roads, Streets and Trails could be open for ORV use (this includes ATV's). The Iron Bridge and Nayoro Park exiting out George St. East and connecting Roads, Streets and Trails have all been mentioned for use by Lindsay Councilor Pat Dunn. In order to access these streets the Legacy Trail (north ward trail) and possibly the Rotary Trail (river trail) would need to be considered. I have concerns because of: Safety Impact - a safe place within our town for all, but especially our children and seniors Health Impact - loss of a healthy, pollution free, safe place for exercise Noise Impact - the quiet areas for walking and cycling for Lindsay residents & visitors would be lost Household Impact - all of the above would impact homes adjacent to the ORV/ATV routes Environmental Impact - the birds, wild life, vegetation and terrain would be severely compromised. There are currently hundreds of kilometres of trails and roads around Lindsay for ORV/ATV use. I am also concerned that there is no representation from Environmental groups, Non-motorized Trail Use groups and Conservation professionals on the Task Force. The City needs to consider its potential legal and liability risks in allowing motor vehicles on trails. Sincerely, Steve and Anne Coppin On Feb 16, 2021, at 9:09 AM, Glenda Morris wrote: Dear Councillor Dunn, I am writing today in response to viewing the first meeting of the ATV task force. You are welcome to share this with other members of the group. It is disappointing and discouraging to see that the task force is proceeding with an assumption that connectivity to trails is desirable, and the task force’s main objective is to determine the locations. No other view, no other options can be heard to be under consideration. Instead the mission that has been agreed to is to put a “positive spin” on increasing ATV traffic. Those of us who walk the trails in Lindsay do so to escape exposure to the noise and fumes of motorized vehicles. Increasing motorized traffic on trails will undermine their primary purpose and compromise the quality of the outdoor experience for a considerable number of residents. Are you Page 4 of 203 Appendix: C To Report: PW2021-002 aware of the level of pedestrian traffic on the trails that go through Lindsay? A casual observation of footprints after a snowfall would be instructive. My response is not intended to demonize ATV riders, but to point out that the activity is not good for the environment, runs contrary to the priorities identified in the CKL Healthy Environment Plan, and thus not good for the community in general. A municipal council has the power to present bylaws and build infrastructure that promote activities healthy for the participant and the environment. I’m looking to you for leadership in promoting personal and environmental health. I hope you will reconsider the premise of the task force, give consideration to other options, and host a healthy discussion that gives respectful consideration to a wide range of voices. Regards, Glenda Morris From: Peter Petrosoniak Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 11:15 PM To: Pat Dunn; Tracy Richardson; Kathleen Seymour-Fagan Cc: Andy Letham; Patrick O'Reilly; Emmett Yeo; Doug Elmslie; Ron Ashmore; Andrew Veale; Bryan Robinson; Chris Marshall Subject: Comments re ATV Task Force issues Dear Councillor Dunn and members of the ATV Task Force, Given that you have started your Task Force meetings, we at Green Trails Alliance, wish to bring the following issues for your consideration as you deliberate the ATV concerns.