Has anyone considered that this “Air-walk” proposal was just an attempt by the land owner to put a scare into the public so that the next ‘real’ development proposal that is presented (ie. 40 new homes) is met with little resistance as everyone is happy that at least its not as bad as the “Air-walk”. Somewhat suspicious for money to be spent on draft proposals before a thorough review of the ‘canopy’ was sufficient. In highly environmentally-conscious areas, many developers/landowners utilize such techniques to get the public to feel relieved that the first bad idea goes away, so then they are more acceptable to the next plan that comes along.
↧