This will go down in history as the biggest white elephant in the town of Concord. Can you imagine Concord is 36% conservation land and they put the kids next to route 2--who the hell came up with this location? I know the field will never be used once the pollution test results come in.
This section of "Walden Woods" isn't really that special. In fact, its on top of a former landfill, sandwiched in between a high school, railroad tracks, and Rt. 2. Its full of garbage, and the only real reason the people on bristers hill care about it is because their large, wasteful houses might lose some value as a result of the construction. I oppose the construction because it destroys the cross-country course and leaves nowhere for our team to run.
According to a 1954 aerial, this area was never part of the landfill, which is under the current high school. This area has always been wooded. Your comments about bristers hill are unfortunate. We should not divide ourselves but join forces. Consensus, not division, would have helped the effort to save the woods. Whatever the reasons, it is too late. The woods are gone. All one needs to do is drive on Rte 2 between Arena Farms and Walden Street to see the devastation.
Taylor, I hope you keep filming. Let's forward this to everyone we know to show the world what the people of Concord chose to do with the land that was entrusted to them.
Let's make sure that we place blame where blame is due. With the 8% of the residents who must be getting fat payoffs. It is important to keep pointing out that it was a tyranny of the minority.
The people who pushed this through don't deserve what Concord has to offer. Perhaps they should move to New Jersey, where plastic grass would be more welcome. As for your insults to Friends of Thoreau Country, save it. Those people did a real service to the community and should be thanked. It is the Fields advocates who are ruining the town for the rest of us.
If this land had public access, this travesty would never have occurred. Most people don't know how to get into it, or they don't want to walk through residents' driveways to get there. It is not unimportant, it is just inaccessible. The only reason it looks like a NIMBY issue is because no one else can get into those woods easily. Even if the woods are owned by the high school, isn't the high school a public facility, meant to educate all students, not just athletes?
Fabulous work, Taylor. Now, let's see if you can capture the kids playing next to the particulate pollution-coughing and wheezing. That will be sadder than the removal of trees. Love, mom
So which is it? Pristine woodland, home to forest animals and cross-country runners, or pollution-filled cesspool, hazard to our young athletes? You can't have it both ways.
Bob, amazingly this important area serves BOTH as a "pristine woodland" and ALSO as a buffer/filter from the particulate & noise pollution from route 2. The trees filter much of this out. I think this is what ConcordTeacher was saying, that preserving the area serves both causes. Also I'm guessing Safesports was referring to the particulate pollution either caused by the construction of the fields or the pollution from rt 2. Now you might be beginning to understand why this is so important.
You may want to read my guest article in today's Journal.And, you bet, CCHS teachers all now nervous and have been in contact with me. I was on ESPN and will be on another show talking about this next week. When this project was first hatched, did anyone put together a VALUES list? Keeping kids safe should have been first but I doubt it evenmade the list. Taylor's mom.
Thank god you've alerted us all to the dangers posed to the boys' and girls' cross-country teams by their current course. The course is sited much closer to Rte. 2 than the playing fields, so we must make sure it's moved out of these woods and into a safe location. And have you notified the neighbors at the top of Brister's Hill? Obviously they've been living in great danger for years. Save them! (sarcasm alert, for those who need it)
X-C runners are ok-still not a great place to run, but-they are running in a virtual HEPA Filter. Same with the Brister's Hill folks and the High School employees--for now they are protected. The problems will happen as soon as you eliminate the trees. Nature's air purifiers.
There will be more trees between Rte. 2 and the fields than there are currently between either Rte. 2 and the current X-C course or Rte. 2 and the houses at the top of BHR.
Bob, your sarcasm isn't appreciated amongst a group of people who genuinely care about Concord. There are an INCREDIBLE number of reasons as to why this particular plot of land isn't the right place to build. Because of these reasons we need to look at the alternative locations and plans that have been proposed instead. You and others like you have not made a worthwhile point as to why this particular plot of land absolutely must be developed despite all the valuable reasons why it should not.
Concord "Bob"—in a few years when your kid is ready to enter the high school, let's talk. If you think the noise on RT 2 is bad now, wait till the sound buffer; those huge old Oak trees are razed. Your kid won't hear a thing in our classrooms. In fact, if she plays soccer on the old tire-fields, chances are her eyes will burn and itch and become infected from the dust and fumes of the trucks. Let's talk then when you see the light: the day she says. "dad, what were they thinking"?
Of course he was a conservationist. But that didn't mean he staged a sit-in every time someone cut a tree. If this tract of land is so important, where are the real conservationists? Why is the Walden Woods Project not opposing the fields? Because this is not a historically significant tract. Who are the main opponents of this project? A guy who develops Wal-Marts for a living and his wife-neighbors of the project.
Bob you shouldn't have to have Walden Woods Project tell you what to think. Even a simpleton can realize that those woods were important to HDT. To me any remaining natural area near the pond is of significant historical value. If you need something more concrete than that, read about Brister's Hill connection with slaves in Concord at friendsofthoreaucountry dot org. And don't be discouraged to become part of a good campaign that happens to have a developer involved with it. It is still good.
Uh huh. Brister Freeman lived on the other side of Walden St., on Brister's Hill-an area already preserved.
This land is privately owned. The general public does not have access to it. And I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of those now trumpeting its conservation didn't realize it existed until it was proposed as a location for the fields. Concord is not a museum. Above all, we cannot afford not to live in the present.
Take a lesson from our good ol friend Henry David and WANDER CONCORD someday, Bob! Get off your stiff old beaten trail and you might find the Concord that the rest of us know and LOVE... a Concord filled with such exquisite beauty in its history its philosophy and its natural wonders that we want to preserve and protect every bit of it.
I HAVE wandered Concord, including this land. I prefer my woods without the noise of Rte. 2 and sight of a bus depot and construction debris. Concord has so many more wild and beautiful areas. Give me Bear Garden Hill, the Estabrook Woods, the Old Rifle Range or any of the many other beautiful conservation areas in town. Try an experiment. Take a twenty minute walk through the HS land. Look and listen. Then walk across the street to the town forest and do the same. You'll notice the difference.
CN, I'd agreee with you if this were a true wilderness area. It's not. It's a small tract of already disturbed land wedge between the bus depot, Rte 2 and the Brister's Hill development. Where was FoTC when Middlesex proposed cutting a significant swathe of the Estabrook Woods (where Thoreau spent as much time as at Walden)?
Bob, I must disagree that Thoreau wouldn't care about this area because it isn't big enough. That doesn't make much sense. Also as you said it represents an important sanctuary for wildlife in an area immediately surrounded by development already. There's a reason you might see a lot of roadkill on rte 2 right around there. Additionally I don't care if it is surrounded by skyscrapers, this is part of one of Thoreau's 4 "great wild tracts" and we should work to save as much of it as possible.
I have to add that I thought the Middlesex expansion into Estabrook was terrible--far worse than this actually for ecological reasons. I don't know where FoTC was for that but I know that has nothing to do with the Brister's Hill area and the fact that we still must work to save this bit of land.
WHAT? 38% of town land is in conservation and the kids are forced to play that close to the highway?!!
FACT-Fewer than 9% of all residents voted to destroy the tree-filter/buffer for the high school.
FACT—stupid is as stupid does. I want the names of these 52 lemmings and the youth sports "leaders."
FACT- once the trees come down and the town knows the dangers, I predict those playing fields will be roped off and declared a health hazard. Where was the Board of Health on this?
Isn't it funny how people move into town and then think they know what's best for people who have lived here all their lives? If you had the first clue about town governance you'd know exactly who the 52 people are. For more info. on the project go to the link on the town website.
Concordbob, I think it's funny that you've lived in Concord your whole life and you didn't realize that Thoreau was a conservationist! I think school children in China know that. Actually now that I think about it more, it's not very funny at all but rather quite scary.
Sometimes it takes new eyes to see somthing glaring that old eyes miss. I think some of the natives couldn't see the forest for the trees on this issue. Actully, many came off as the true NIMBBYs--many were protecting their moats (land given to the town to eliminate their taxes).
(continued) their values really were. Somehow I don't think they involve lacrosse fields or barely higher property values.
Besides the important historical and ecological nature of these woods, perhaps most importantly they represent a symbolic connection to the historical Concord of yesterday--a Concord that once valued people like Thoreau and wanted to protect historical woods like these. Please ask yourselves what we can do to make people like Emerson and Thoreau proud.
(continued) Forget historical MORAL values, the people in town today are just concerned with fancy Colonial homes! (oh and playing fields). Of course this is a trend that doesn't represent everyone, but it's certainly upsetting.
We need to rethink how we make decisions. We really must ask ourselves, "How would Emerson or Thoreau react to this?" In a town where we claim to share the same values as these amazing thinkers, we need to constantly remind ourselves of what (continued)
It is distressing to watch the current generation of Concordians turn their back on the town's historical values. Particularly for something as superfluous as additional PLAYING FIELDS (when the existing ones are only used a few hours each day, and when many alternative options were put on the table).
It seems to me that today's Concordians only care about "historical value" if it ups the real estate value of their house! (continued...)
Thoreau was a surveyor. If he were alive today, he would likely be working on this project.
Emerson was the one who gave Thoreau permission to chop down trees to build a cabin and a bean field in Walden Woods. How would he feel about attempts by busybody neighbors to tell him what he could do with his own land?
First off, congrats to Taylor for capturing Concord with their pants down. This is a total crime. If Thoreau were alive today he would point out that our fields are in deplorable condition and need a parks department who know what the heck they are doing. Look at the private school fields. They do a great job of maintaining them. Take the 4 million and re-sod, add the correct irrigation ditches, clean the culverts, get a recreation director who has know how to maintain what we have, etc.
Bob, on the contrary, Thoreau is famous worldwide for being a conservationist and a vocal critic of the development of wilderness areas. That's why this is so ironic. It's exactly people like you who have a minimal understanding of Concord's historical roots, and consequently have these uninformed opinions. Felling a few trees in a sustainable manner to build a log cabin and live as a naturalist is very different than clear-cutting a large area of public land to slap artificial turf on it.
I am new to town and I did not turn my back. what you need to focus on is how few of the total population(less than 10%) actually voted to construct the articficial fields. It took generations for those wonderful old oaks to grow and 15 miuntes to be mulched. i was up there and saw the hawks crying. We need to know who these private groups really are.
Don't you guys have term limits in Concord for the town Manager, Recreation Manager, town moderator, sports board and coaches? I heard that most of the men who rammed this through have a strong-hold on the youth sports in that town and most have been "running the show" for over ten/fifteen years. Take it from your neighbors:
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
Sadly, this was sponsored by the town manager and the playing fields men (presidents of their youth teams) I voted for the playing fields. I was sucked in by my son's coach who would have sat him on the bench if I didn't. They even told us not to vote for a secret ballot. I can never feel good about this. The more I learn the more I want to puke. Thank you for the videao. It doesn't lie.
I live in Concord. I am not an abutter. I applaud anyone who is fighting the destruction of the Walden Woods. It doesn't matter one damn to me who they are . What matters is this is crazy. It took many of those trees 100 years to grow. It took less than ten minutes to fell them, chip them and get a giggle from Mr. Whelan. I read that only 1320 people in the town voted to do this. Surly that is an overwhelming approval by its citizens. Have these 1320 people gone mad? Follow the money folks.
1. Not one of the trees on this site is more than 60 years old. Perhaps this is because before the HS was built it was the site of the town DUMP.
2. Who do you suggest is profiting from this project. The volunteers who have worked for years to build the first new playing fields to Concord in FORTY years? Name names or shut up.
Clearly you know nothing about this issue. The fields were approved by 75% of voters in the largest town meeting in Concord's history. I know this bec. unlike you I attended both TMs at which it was approved by our town.
The BoH only votes on issues that involve structures. Every RELEVANT board in town approved it by an overall vote of 52-1. IOW, out of every board member who looked at the project including the NRC and Historical Comm only 1 voted against it. Get your facts straight.
In other words, this video appears to be just another attempt by a group of disgruntled, hypocritical people to disguise their "not in my back yard" complaints in the sacred cloak of Thoreau and environmentalism.
This trivializes the heroic work of true environmentalists, many of whom publicly supported this project.
What a shame. We should be concentrating our efforts on truly worthy projects. Overwhelmingly and very carefully, the town has said this isn't one of them.
"Mathews said officials have been discussing the possible expansion of Wal-Mart with the Ken Hecht Companies of Concord, Mass., a developer which represents Wal-Mart's interests in the area. Mayor Susan D. Menard, Administration Director Michael Annarummo and Economic Development Director Jeffrey Polucha have been involved in the negotiations, Mathews said.
The land Wal-Mart is eyeing is part of a parcel that was donated to the city about 40 years ago by Ferland Associates, which developed the nearby Walnut Hill Apartments. Consisting of some 15 acres in all, the land is roughly bounded by Patton Road, Rock Ridge Road, and Wal-Mart. The land is presently zoned for open space and would have to be rezoned by the City Council before it could be developed for retail use, Mathews said.
Mr. Hecht is the broker representing Wal-Mart on that deal, not the developer. He does not, nor has he ever, been a developer for Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is the developer on that deal. Like I said, get your facts straight, Concordbob.
It's not splitting hairs, Bob. A broker and a developer play very different roles. You should only write about things of which you are certain. Obviously, this is not one of them. This project is an expansion of an existing store. Maybe the Woonsocket neighbors want it. Who are you to say what others might want? Again, you should watch what you write.
Maybe the city should have considered the neighbors BEFORE they put the property on the market. Funny how the proponents of the fields think these neighbors have rights but they call the Bristers Hill neighborhood a bunch of NIMBY's.
Anyhow it is completely irrelevant that somebody in town might be a hypocrite. That is their own personal problem and it has nothing to do with whether this is the right thing to do or not.
Let's face it, this is a bad plan from so many different aspects: financial, historical, environmental and health wise. Maybe that is why a real estate professional believed that "recycling our existing fields" was a better idea. Someone who looks at real estate all the time might just have a different perspective and different reasons for not supporting this plan. In fact, the one lone dissenting vote on all the Concord boards and commiittees is also a real estate professional.
Boncord Slob--get a life. You are nothing but a jerk spreading rumors. Frankly, I was at the site this morning and I am taking bets that the MDEP closes the place down the minute the first kids and their coaches take to the field. Have you and your buddies been to the site? We may as well be in the Bronx or Harlem. 29% conservation land in Concord and we shun our children to play by the road. Great! You should shut up and hide your head in shame.
Powerful video! See Chris Whelan, town manager chuckling? May '06, Whelan, tried to get cell towers (in a flag pole) up behind the High School. School said NO. Two months later, Whelan cooks up a scheme to build playing fields in the Walden Woods. Trees in the video are being cut for the road to the soccer fields are going in the exact spot that he wanted for access to the cell tower. Bet we'll see an 80 ft flag pole next to the soccer fields. See Chris chuckle all the way to the bank.
As I see it, you are either pro Walden Woods, pro environment or pro destroying the earth like Mr. Galgay has a record for.
JeffJay1960 2 years ago
fuck walden woods and fuck taylor delench
conorgalgay 4 years ago
conor, you dick!
taylordelench 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As I see it, you are either pro Walden Woods, pro environment or pro destroying the earth like Mr. Galgay has a record for.
JeffJay1960 2 years ago
This will go down in history as the biggest white elephant in the town of Concord. Can you imagine Concord is 36% conservation land and they put the kids next to route 2--who the hell came up with this location? I know the field will never be used once the pollution test results come in.
JeffJay1960 4 years ago
This section of "Walden Woods" isn't really that special. In fact, its on top of a former landfill, sandwiched in between a high school, railroad tracks, and Rt. 2. Its full of garbage, and the only real reason the people on bristers hill care about it is because their large, wasteful houses might lose some value as a result of the construction. I oppose the construction because it destroys the cross-country course and leaves nowhere for our team to run.
ellukeaduke 4 years ago
According to a 1954 aerial, this area was never part of the landfill, which is under the current high school. This area has always been wooded. Your comments about bristers hill are unfortunate. We should not divide ourselves but join forces. Consensus, not division, would have helped the effort to save the woods. Whatever the reasons, it is too late. The woods are gone. All one needs to do is drive on Rte 2 between Arena Farms and Walden Street to see the devastation.
LoveTheWoods 4 years ago
The "Walden Woods Wrecked" video is now up. So awful.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
Taylor, I hope you keep filming. Let's forward this to everyone we know to show the world what the people of Concord chose to do with the land that was entrusted to them.
friendoftrees 4 years ago
Let's make sure that we place blame where blame is due. With the 8% of the residents who must be getting fat payoffs. It is important to keep pointing out that it was a tyranny of the minority.
JeffJay1960 4 years ago
The people who pushed this through don't deserve what Concord has to offer. Perhaps they should move to New Jersey, where plastic grass would be more welcome. As for your insults to Friends of Thoreau Country, save it. Those people did a real service to the community and should be thanked. It is the Fields advocates who are ruining the town for the rest of us.
friendoftrees 4 years ago
If this land had public access, this travesty would never have occurred. Most people don't know how to get into it, or they don't want to walk through residents' driveways to get there. It is not unimportant, it is just inaccessible. The only reason it looks like a NIMBY issue is because no one else can get into those woods easily. Even if the woods are owned by the high school, isn't the high school a public facility, meant to educate all students, not just athletes?
friendoftrees 4 years ago
Fabulous work, Taylor. Now, let's see if you can capture the kids playing next to the particulate pollution-coughing and wheezing. That will be sadder than the removal of trees. Love, mom
safesports 4 years ago
So which is it? Pristine woodland, home to forest animals and cross-country runners, or pollution-filled cesspool, hazard to our young athletes? You can't have it both ways.
concordbob 4 years ago
Bob, amazingly this important area serves BOTH as a "pristine woodland" and ALSO as a buffer/filter from the particulate & noise pollution from route 2. The trees filter much of this out. I think this is what ConcordTeacher was saying, that preserving the area serves both causes. Also I'm guessing Safesports was referring to the particulate pollution either caused by the construction of the fields or the pollution from rt 2. Now you might be beginning to understand why this is so important.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
You may want to read my guest article in today's Journal.And, you bet, CCHS teachers all now nervous and have been in contact with me. I was on ESPN and will be on another show talking about this next week. When this project was first hatched, did anyone put together a VALUES list? Keeping kids safe should have been first but I doubt it evenmade the list. Taylor's mom.
safesports 4 years ago
Thank god you've alerted us all to the dangers posed to the boys' and girls' cross-country teams by their current course. The course is sited much closer to Rte. 2 than the playing fields, so we must make sure it's moved out of these woods and into a safe location. And have you notified the neighbors at the top of Brister's Hill? Obviously they've been living in great danger for years. Save them! (sarcasm alert, for those who need it)
concordbob 4 years ago
X-C runners are ok-still not a great place to run, but-they are running in a virtual HEPA Filter. Same with the Brister's Hill folks and the High School employees--for now they are protected. The problems will happen as soon as you eliminate the trees. Nature's air purifiers.
safesports 4 years ago
There will be more trees between Rte. 2 and the fields than there are currently between either Rte. 2 and the current X-C course or Rte. 2 and the houses at the top of BHR.
concordbob 4 years ago
Bob, your sarcasm isn't appreciated amongst a group of people who genuinely care about Concord. There are an INCREDIBLE number of reasons as to why this particular plot of land isn't the right place to build. Because of these reasons we need to look at the alternative locations and plans that have been proposed instead. You and others like you have not made a worthwhile point as to why this particular plot of land absolutely must be developed despite all the valuable reasons why it should not.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
Concord "Bob"—in a few years when your kid is ready to enter the high school, let's talk. If you think the noise on RT 2 is bad now, wait till the sound buffer; those huge old Oak trees are razed. Your kid won't hear a thing in our classrooms. In fact, if she plays soccer on the old tire-fields, chances are her eyes will burn and itch and become infected from the dust and fumes of the trucks. Let's talk then when you see the light: the day she says. "dad, what were they thinking"?
ConcordTeacher 4 years ago
Of course he was a conservationist. But that didn't mean he staged a sit-in every time someone cut a tree. If this tract of land is so important, where are the real conservationists? Why is the Walden Woods Project not opposing the fields? Because this is not a historically significant tract. Who are the main opponents of this project? A guy who develops Wal-Marts for a living and his wife-neighbors of the project.
concordbob 4 years ago
Bob you shouldn't have to have Walden Woods Project tell you what to think. Even a simpleton can realize that those woods were important to HDT. To me any remaining natural area near the pond is of significant historical value. If you need something more concrete than that, read about Brister's Hill connection with slaves in Concord at friendsofthoreaucountry dot org. And don't be discouraged to become part of a good campaign that happens to have a developer involved with it. It is still good.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
Uh huh. Brister Freeman lived on the other side of Walden St., on Brister's Hill-an area already preserved.
This land is privately owned. The general public does not have access to it. And I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of those now trumpeting its conservation didn't realize it existed until it was proposed as a location for the fields. Concord is not a museum. Above all, we cannot afford not to live in the present.
concordbob 4 years ago
Take a lesson from our good ol friend Henry David and WANDER CONCORD someday, Bob! Get off your stiff old beaten trail and you might find the Concord that the rest of us know and LOVE... a Concord filled with such exquisite beauty in its history its philosophy and its natural wonders that we want to preserve and protect every bit of it.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
I HAVE wandered Concord, including this land. I prefer my woods without the noise of Rte. 2 and sight of a bus depot and construction debris. Concord has so many more wild and beautiful areas. Give me Bear Garden Hill, the Estabrook Woods, the Old Rifle Range or any of the many other beautiful conservation areas in town. Try an experiment. Take a twenty minute walk through the HS land. Look and listen. Then walk across the street to the town forest and do the same. You'll notice the difference.
concordbob 4 years ago
CN, I'd agreee with you if this were a true wilderness area. It's not. It's a small tract of already disturbed land wedge between the bus depot, Rte 2 and the Brister's Hill development. Where was FoTC when Middlesex proposed cutting a significant swathe of the Estabrook Woods (where Thoreau spent as much time as at Walden)?
concordbob 4 years ago
Bob, I must disagree that Thoreau wouldn't care about this area because it isn't big enough. That doesn't make much sense. Also as you said it represents an important sanctuary for wildlife in an area immediately surrounded by development already. There's a reason you might see a lot of roadkill on rte 2 right around there. Additionally I don't care if it is surrounded by skyscrapers, this is part of one of Thoreau's 4 "great wild tracts" and we should work to save as much of it as possible.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
I have to add that I thought the Middlesex expansion into Estabrook was terrible--far worse than this actually for ecological reasons. I don't know where FoTC was for that but I know that has nothing to do with the Brister's Hill area and the fact that we still must work to save this bit of land.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
Largest voter turnout in town history.
Huge majority (over 75%) in favor.
Town boards 52-1 in favor.
Not a single tree more than 60 years old.
Current fields horridly overused.
No new field in 40 years.
38% of town land in permanent conservation.
Facts.
concordbob 4 years ago
WHAT? 38% of town land is in conservation and the kids are forced to play that close to the highway?!!
FACT-Fewer than 9% of all residents voted to destroy the tree-filter/buffer for the high school.
FACT—stupid is as stupid does. I want the names of these 52 lemmings and the youth sports "leaders."
FACT- once the trees come down and the town knows the dangers, I predict those playing fields will be roped off and declared a health hazard. Where was the Board of Health on this?
NewtoTowntoo 4 years ago
Isn't it funny how people move into town and then think they know what's best for people who have lived here all their lives? If you had the first clue about town governance you'd know exactly who the 52 people are. For more info. on the project go to the link on the town website.
concordbob 4 years ago
Concordbob, I think it's funny that you've lived in Concord your whole life and you didn't realize that Thoreau was a conservationist! I think school children in China know that. Actually now that I think about it more, it's not very funny at all but rather quite scary.
ConserveConcord 4 years ago
Sometimes it takes new eyes to see somthing glaring that old eyes miss. I think some of the natives couldn't see the forest for the trees on this issue. Actully, many came off as the true NIMBBYs--many were protecting their moats (land given to the town to eliminate their taxes).
NewtoTowntoo 4 years ago
Can you clarify the NIMBY/moats comment?
concordbob 4 years ago
Scroll to the bottom and click on link: View all comments. Very telling info here
StunnedinConcord 4 years ago
Excellent video, Mr. Taylor.! You captured Concord's Inconvenient Truth.
NewstonsCindy 4 years ago
(continued) their values really were. Somehow I don't think they involve lacrosse fields or barely higher property values.
Besides the important historical and ecological nature of these woods, perhaps most importantly they represent a symbolic connection to the historical Concord of yesterday--a Concord that once valued people like Thoreau and wanted to protect historical woods like these. Please ask yourselves what we can do to make people like Emerson and Thoreau proud.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
(continued) Forget historical MORAL values, the people in town today are just concerned with fancy Colonial homes! (oh and playing fields). Of course this is a trend that doesn't represent everyone, but it's certainly upsetting.
We need to rethink how we make decisions. We really must ask ourselves, "How would Emerson or Thoreau react to this?" In a town where we claim to share the same values as these amazing thinkers, we need to constantly remind ourselves of what (continued)
ConcordNative 4 years ago
Would Thoreau and Emerson be proud?
It is distressing to watch the current generation of Concordians turn their back on the town's historical values. Particularly for something as superfluous as additional PLAYING FIELDS (when the existing ones are only used a few hours each day, and when many alternative options were put on the table).
It seems to me that today's Concordians only care about "historical value" if it ups the real estate value of their house! (continued...)
ConcordNative 4 years ago
Would Thoreau and Emerson be proud?
Thoreau was a surveyor. If he were alive today, he would likely be working on this project.
Emerson was the one who gave Thoreau permission to chop down trees to build a cabin and a bean field in Walden Woods. How would he feel about attempts by busybody neighbors to tell him what he could do with his own land?
concordbob 4 years ago
First off, congrats to Taylor for capturing Concord with their pants down. This is a total crime. If Thoreau were alive today he would point out that our fields are in deplorable condition and need a parks department who know what the heck they are doing. Look at the private school fields. They do a great job of maintaining them. Take the 4 million and re-sod, add the correct irrigation ditches, clean the culverts, get a recreation director who has know how to maintain what we have, etc.
StunnedinConcord 4 years ago
Bob, on the contrary, Thoreau is famous worldwide for being a conservationist and a vocal critic of the development of wilderness areas. That's why this is so ironic. It's exactly people like you who have a minimal understanding of Concord's historical roots, and consequently have these uninformed opinions. Felling a few trees in a sustainable manner to build a log cabin and live as a naturalist is very different than clear-cutting a large area of public land to slap artificial turf on it.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
I am new to town and I did not turn my back. what you need to focus on is how few of the total population(less than 10%) actually voted to construct the articficial fields. It took generations for those wonderful old oaks to grow and 15 miuntes to be mulched. i was up there and saw the hawks crying. We need to know who these private groups really are.
StunnedinConcord 4 years ago
Don't you guys have term limits in Concord for the town Manager, Recreation Manager, town moderator, sports board and coaches? I heard that most of the men who rammed this through have a strong-hold on the youth sports in that town and most have been "running the show" for over ten/fifteen years. Take it from your neighbors:
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
~ Lord Acton
Jeffdeadfan 4 years ago
Follow the Money. Crazy power hungry people, doing crazy destructive shit = big money. Follow the money.
XMbigbobby 4 years ago
Sadly, this was sponsored by the town manager and the playing fields men (presidents of their youth teams) I voted for the playing fields. I was sucked in by my son's coach who would have sat him on the bench if I didn't. They even told us not to vote for a secret ballot. I can never feel good about this. The more I learn the more I want to puke. Thank you for the videao. It doesn't lie.
SueBee1972 4 years ago
I live in Concord. I am not an abutter. I applaud anyone who is fighting the destruction of the Walden Woods. It doesn't matter one damn to me who they are . What matters is this is crazy. It took many of those trees 100 years to grow. It took less than ten minutes to fell them, chip them and get a giggle from Mr. Whelan. I read that only 1320 people in the town voted to do this. Surly that is an overwhelming approval by its citizens. Have these 1320 people gone mad? Follow the money folks.
JeffJay1960 4 years ago
1. Not one of the trees on this site is more than 60 years old. Perhaps this is because before the HS was built it was the site of the town DUMP.
2. Who do you suggest is profiting from this project. The volunteers who have worked for years to build the first new playing fields to Concord in FORTY years? Name names or shut up.
concordbob 4 years ago
Misleading? Destroying a vital portion of Walden Woods? Bunk! More things that the video did not show:
1. Less than 10% of the residents voted to destroy these woods at a rigged town meeting
2. The Board of Health was the only town board not allowed to vote
3. The Board of Health Director quit after town meeting
4. These huge old shade trees kept the High School cool
5. These trees were the High School XC trail
6. The Trees filter the pollution from Route 2 traffic
JeffJay1960 4 years ago
Clearly you know nothing about this issue. The fields were approved by 75% of voters in the largest town meeting in Concord's history. I know this bec. unlike you I attended both TMs at which it was approved by our town.
The BoH only votes on issues that involve structures. Every RELEVANT board in town approved it by an overall vote of 52-1. IOW, out of every board member who looked at the project including the NRC and Historical Comm only 1 voted against it. Get your facts straight.
concordbob 4 years ago
(continued)
In other words, this video appears to be just another attempt by a group of disgruntled, hypocritical people to disguise their "not in my back yard" complaints in the sacred cloak of Thoreau and environmentalism.
This trivializes the heroic work of true environmentalists, many of whom publicly supported this project.
What a shame. We should be concentrating our efforts on truly worthy projects. Overwhelmingly and very carefully, the town has said this isn't one of them.
concordnews 4 years ago
5 things this misleading video doesn't show you:
1. That the loudest opposition is from nearby residents whose houses are also cut into Walden Woods
2. That their leaders are New England's biggest Wal-Mart developers in other people's back yards.
3. That the Concord Historical Commission found no historical significance to this property
4. That far from being "pristine" the trees border a major highway and a bus parking area.
5. That the citizens of Concord overwhelmingly approved.
concordnews 4 years ago
You should do your homework. The leaders are not, nor have they ever been, developers for Wal-Mart. Be careful and get your facts straight.
LoveTheWoods 4 years ago
RUSS OLIVO, Staff Writer,
The Call, Woonsocket, RI
11/20/2003
"Mathews said officials have been discussing the possible expansion of Wal-Mart with the Ken Hecht Companies of Concord, Mass., a developer which represents Wal-Mart's interests in the area. Mayor Susan D. Menard, Administration Director Michael Annarummo and Economic Development Director Jeffrey Polucha have been involved in the negotiations, Mathews said.
concordbob 4 years ago
The land Wal-Mart is eyeing is part of a parcel that was donated to the city about 40 years ago by Ferland Associates, which developed the nearby Walnut Hill Apartments. Consisting of some 15 acres in all, the land is roughly bounded by Patton Road, Rock Ridge Road, and Wal-Mart. The land is presently zoned for open space and would have to be rezoned by the City Council before it could be developed for retail use, Mathews said.
concordbob 4 years ago
Mr. Hecht is the broker representing Wal-Mart on that deal, not the developer. He does not, nor has he ever, been a developer for Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is the developer on that deal. Like I said, get your facts straight, Concordbob.
LoveTheWoods 4 years ago
Splitting hairs, are we? I'm sure the Woonsocket neighbors would appreciate the difference.
concordbob 4 years ago
It's not splitting hairs, Bob. A broker and a developer play very different roles. You should only write about things of which you are certain. Obviously, this is not one of them. This project is an expansion of an existing store. Maybe the Woonsocket neighbors want it. Who are you to say what others might want? Again, you should watch what you write.
LoveTheWoods 4 years ago
Is that why they filed suit to block the project?
concordbob 4 years ago
Maybe the city should have considered the neighbors BEFORE they put the property on the market. Funny how the proponents of the fields think these neighbors have rights but they call the Bristers Hill neighborhood a bunch of NIMBY's.
LoveTheWoods 4 years ago
Anyhow it is completely irrelevant that somebody in town might be a hypocrite. That is their own personal problem and it has nothing to do with whether this is the right thing to do or not.
ConcordNative 4 years ago
Let's face it, this is a bad plan from so many different aspects: financial, historical, environmental and health wise. Maybe that is why a real estate professional believed that "recycling our existing fields" was a better idea. Someone who looks at real estate all the time might just have a different perspective and different reasons for not supporting this plan. In fact, the one lone dissenting vote on all the Concord boards and commiittees is also a real estate professional.
LoveTheWoods 4 years ago
Boncord Slob--get a life. You are nothing but a jerk spreading rumors. Frankly, I was at the site this morning and I am taking bets that the MDEP closes the place down the minute the first kids and their coaches take to the field. Have you and your buddies been to the site? We may as well be in the Bronx or Harlem. 29% conservation land in Concord and we shun our children to play by the road. Great! You should shut up and hide your head in shame.
JeffJay1960 4 years ago
Powerful video! See Chris Whelan, town manager chuckling? May '06, Whelan, tried to get cell towers (in a flag pole) up behind the High School. School said NO. Two months later, Whelan cooks up a scheme to build playing fields in the Walden Woods. Trees in the video are being cut for the road to the soccer fields are going in the exact spot that he wanted for access to the cell tower. Bet we'll see an 80 ft flag pole next to the soccer fields. See Chris chuckle all the way to the bank.
Geobrew 4 years ago