Dear Editor,
BEWARE of false knowledge, it is more dangerous than ignorance. The recent declaration by Georgetown’s mayor that the land is owned by the M&CC, is just simply shocking.
This uninformed comment is in reference to the plot of land that is located along Eping Avenue, Bel Air Park, Georgetown, and which is earmarked as the Bel Air Park playground.
How could officials of a municipality and who would have access to the transport and other documents related to this property not know that this community reserve forms part of the mandatory open-space requirements established by the Town and County Planning Act, the Public Health Ordinance, and the Housing Act, necessary for Bel Air Park to remain a residential community?

How could the mayor and town clerk not be aware that there exists a specific prohibition on the use of the property in favour of all residents of Bel Air Park for purposes other than recreational purposes. The records show clearly that historically, this piece of land known as R3 existed as an open space, first as an airfield, then as a horse race course and thereafter was maintained by the M&CC and Housing Department from the 1960s through the 1990s as a park, used by residents as a playground and cricket field. The circumstance that the land has since been taken over by weeds and overgrown and the fact that the mayor declared that the land was there all along and no one was doing anything with it, when it is the Council’s responsibility to maintain all open spaces including this one, is a reminder of the crudity and inanity of City Hall. The burning question in all of this that one has to ask the Mayor and City Council (M&CC) is what has happened to the plan they had to pursue with the restoration of the renowned “Garden City,” doing so is within an eco-friendly, green-environment framework.

City Hall was supposed to engage in the restoration of recreational areas for public convenience. They said they were going to restore recreational parks, playgrounds, sporting facilities and other social areas where the young and old could meet and talk, where uptown can meet downtown and dwell. Building luxury homes for municipal officers on recreational property would not achieve this.
Regards
James Mc Onnel