To The Editor:
To the Fayston Planning Commission:
I attended the Fayston Planning Commission meeting on July 14 and I am dismayed to hear that you believe the consensus of those attending was in favor of leaving the word “shall” in the draft Land Use Regulations being proposed for Fayston paths/trails on private land. That is certainly not what I would support, and I know many landowners would agree with me.
It would be helpful if there was a clear definition of and distinction made between what constitutes a path versus a trail. To my mind, a walkway from a house to an outbuilding, pond, tennis court or to a neighbor’s house, for instance, does not constitute a trail. Such a walkway is intended for the homeowner’s use, not the public. I should think that type of walkway would clearly be a path and that it should not be subject to LURs. I think that what might be called a trail, in that it could accommodate two people walking side-by-side, should not be subject to LURs either if it is constructed on private property for the use of the homeowner’s family (and friends upon invitation). In this instance, I would support using the word “should” in following LUR recommendations when referring to the construction and maintenance of private trails.
I understand the goal of the Planning Commission LURs is to prevent storm runoff from degrading the town’s streams and brooks as well as to prevent homeowners from doing anything on their land that would negatively affect their neighbors with regard to stormwater runoff. I believe this is the goal of Fayston landowners, too. In fact, I take offense at the suggestion that I, as a Fayston landowner, would do anything to the contrary. But I also understand that a fair amount of education (as opposed to regulation) is needed in order to ensure this goal. Perhaps this is something the groups that promote outdoor recreation could take on.
Speaking of walking on private land, I do think there is an increasing problem of people walking across private land without the landowner’s permission. It used to be common knowledge that you always asked the landowner for permission before doing so. I have heard more and more landowners say they have or intend to post their land because they are fed up with the number of people walking across it, especially when they bring their dogs with them.
To end, please know that I do appreciate the work the Planning Commission does. As I know from being on any number of committees, it is a volunteer effort that is frequently thankless despite the best of intentions.
You might also like
Sally Dwyer
Fayston
