Dear Editor
Regarding "City pushes for downtown professional services" (Regional Optimist, May 6), one has to wonder . . . is this another April Fool's joke?
First of all, I must be clear I have no vested interest in this issue. I have nothing to gain or lose regarding this decision.
That being said, I cannot believe this application was diend for the illogical reasons stated. A professional office would be a reasonable, approprit euse for this attractive building. It has easy access, not traffic flow issues and ample parking. Can any of this be said for any existing downtown property? Is there a suitatble, attractive building with easy access and no traffic flow issues? Is there ample parking?
The article refers to Councillor Lang contributing to the discussion that it is a beaitufl building, but a not so great location far from amenities and public transit. The not so great location is a block from Sobeys. What amenities does Councillor Laing think it requires - a liquor store, a pawn shop?
Can such a limited transit system as is available in North Battleford even be a consideration in a decision like this? Do you think the professionals involved haven't looked at location, amenities and accessibility?
As far as revitalizing downtown, even city council chose to bypass public property and build in not so great location far from amenities and public transit.
Communities in Saskatchewan are struggling to attract and retain doctors. I would bet many of these communities would be happy to approve this application in their towns.
Denying this application is a mistake that may cost North Battleford valuable services.
City council, use your discretion regarding this issue. Rethink it.
Brenda Sparrow
North Battleford
