Well, people benefit from the conservation areas. This area is a large plot of woods because it was private property.How do you have such a large plot of woods in a city like this? This whole area is filled with conservation areas, does anyone benefit from these areas?
The lawyers have certainly benefited immensely from the *vigorously litigated* Webster Woods... which are essentially next-door. (The southwest corner of Webster Woods is only a half-mile from the northeast corner of this parcel/development site, I see.)does anyone benefit from these areas?
I disagree with that - a lot of them were donated recreational land meant to be kept as recreational space, like Norumbega Park in Newton.The "conservation areas" are almost all just NIMBYism to prevent development. Areas of land in the suburbs that no one can access for "environmental reasons" but really so that no one else can move to their town. The history of these places is well documented in CA (and I think in MA).
If they're actual accessible park land, that's different. But there's enormous amounts of conservation land that is just closed and useless. Gov't protected NIMBYismI disagree with that - a lot of them were donated recreational land meant to be kept as recreational space, like Norumbega Park in Newton.
They're basically "state parks" at the municipal level - city parks but covered in trees.
What types of recreational activities are happening at these woods?I disagree with that - a lot of them were donated recreational land meant to be kept as recreational space, like Norumbega Park in Newton.
They're basically "state parks" at the municipal level - city parks but covered in trees.
I bet lots of walking and dog walking if they put paths in.What types of recreational activities are happening at these woods?