COUNCILLOR Therese Doyle’s timely article (‘‘The bottom line: the books aren’t that bad’’ Herald 30/1) is a reminder of the charter of obligations councils mustfulfilone of those obligations being the provision of recreational parks.
It is therefore difficult to understand council’s decision to sacrifice part of King Edward Park, the headland, to commercial development.
After the bowling club lease was revoked, the headland was dedicated in 2005 for the use of the public as of right. It is part of King Edward Park.
The public has since been excluded from the headland by unsightly fencing. The land is flat but our children cannot play there, seniors cannot stroll there, we cannot picnic there, we cannot enjoy the view there.
The disbelief of visitors at the neglect of this historic site shames us.
We must not accept the alienation of the public from part of the park, nor should we accept the loss of amenity.
The park is for the people, not for the business interests of developers.
The case against the approval of the development application for the headland is now before the court.
Friends of King Edward Park are seeking to impose public law obligations on the council and the minister responsible for the protection of heritage items and public reserve.