To the Editor:
It is shortsighted to turn an environmental responsibility into a popular vote over one- or two-way access on Lake Mansfield Road. It is untrue that Hill residents who support the Lake Mansfield Road proposal are necessarily in favor of one way – many, including me, use the two-way access regularly and, as Mr. Wise pointed out, all else being equal, would likely prefer continued two-way access. I suspect we will all ultimately bear some impact of this improvement to the road forcing each of us to adapt our habits in one way or another.
The question here is about environmental conservation and protection of water quality and the surrounding landscape that is home to abundant wildlife. Do you know the Lake Mansfield area is home to countless species of birds, including bald eagles? Turtles, fish, mammals of all sizes and I am sure more reptiles than I care to encounter? We are not the only ones who inhabit this beautiful landscape. Over time, the asphalt road along with its toxic salt has quite literally crumbled into the lake; the land beneath and beside the former roadway is eroded. There simply is less land width to work with now than before.
With the way the road is used – heavily by pedestrians, cyclists, fishermen and women and drivers alike, all these concerns must be addressed as best possible as we approach solving the question: how do we make necessary repairs to Lake Mansfield Road while ensuring stewardship of this natural resource and ultimate safety for all?
Stating that Lake Mansfield has always been two way and thus should remain so and that this proposal has been raised in the past, was rejected and thus should be rejected again discounts the current environmental limits of the said space, not to mention the greater cost, as I understand it, associated with the two-way plan.
I walk or run or bike on Lake Mansfield Road nearly daily and I can assure you that two-way traffic plus a pedestrian is unsafe in several locations along the road – not because of my or the drivers’ behavior – but because the natural environment simply cannot support two way traffic in some areas of the road.
One thing of which I am certain: the answer is not to deter pedestrians from using the road. With a great portion of America obese and/or sick with diabetes, all being instructed to start walking and moving their bodies, we as a community have an opportunity to make a powerful statement here by embracing the fact that people use this road for health pursuits as we consider the proposal; preventative health pursuits, I might add, that are linked to lower usage of the overwhelmed, partially taxpayer-funded, medical system.
My thanks to the Great Barrington Land Conservancy, the Lake Mansfield Alliance and our Great Barrington Town Selectboard for their careful attention to this important question.
Kate Banks
Great Barrington
