6 thoughts on “Q&A: Town Councilor Talks About Removal of Trees in Town by Cambridge

  1. If The City of Cambridge in fact owns the land, does that mean that they own a twenty foot strip across Mt Auburn Street near the New York Diner and on to Arsenal Street where the pipe travels Easterly to School Street and jogs left to the original RR right of way by Randy’s Car Wash where it follows the walking path to Arlington Street where
    it crosses over to the RR right of way, then why isn’t Cambridge sharing the cost of maintenance & upgrades to the aforementioned roadways? And wouldn’t it be on Cambridge to foot the bill for extending the walking path to meet existing pathways at Fresh Pond?

  2. Whether or not you like the answers Vinnie did a great job explaining the situation & I appreciate him taking the time to write these concise answers.
    Thanks for the follow up Charlie

  3. Vinnie did a good job as did Charlie in answering questions and making the public aware.
    The fact remains that twenty feet of land, most of it on our streets and the RR right of way belong to Cambridge. I think the questions I’ve asked are valid questions.

  4. Pipeman,
    I’d guess that Cambridge allows Watertown to build roads over the pipe via easements, so they’re Watertown’s roads & hence Watertown’s responsibility; otherwise Cambridge would probably let the land grow wild as they’ve done in the Linear Park sections.

  5. Question: If the abutters had fences up for the term of laws of adverse possession, wouldn’t that land now be theirs? Not a lawyer but something to think about if they were ‘in use’ for the time period in the statue for MA.

  6. Hovercraft,
    I’m not familiar with the laws that you cited but my guess would be no. I think that you’re suggesting that Cambridge has abandoned the land & that abutters may have lawfully claimed it, but because it’s publicly held land facilitating the water supply, if challenged in court a judge would have to consider that your interpretation would set a precedent that would put a significant burden on all municipalities to regularly & actively claim all land that they own from abutters’ encroachment which would essentially be impossible

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *