Abutters troubled by cost, not public access
In the Nov. 21 editorial (“To build or not to build an elevated boardwalk”) about the proposed raised boardwalk at the Hull Cove access, the Press wrote, “Opponents to the boardwalk ... would prefer to keep the cove to themselves. Abutters to Hull Cove are especially keen on limiting the number of people who visit the scenic spot.”
This is a serious misrepresentation of fact. In our letter to the Conservation Commission, I and nine other Hull Cove residents stated, “We would like ... to be clear that we welcome public access to Hull Cove beach. We feel the path should be improved or at least maintained so that it is more easily used.”
The letter is public record. Please try to be more accurate in your editorials.
Our opposition to the proposed boardwalk is based on other issues. As a town structure, it will be a financial and legal liability for the town in future years, when it must be maintained, periodically rebuilt, and when people are injured on it.
We are particularly distressed by the CRMC’s position of “boardwalk or nothing.” We feel there are several ground-level improvement options that would cost less and be easier for the town to maintain in the long run.
William W. Smith II
Hull Cove Farm Road