Thread: Farm Island
View Single Post
Old 07-21-2019, 02:12 PM   #42
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 2,209
Thanks: 1,111
Thanked 934 Times in 576 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
You make it sound as if it's a big conspiracy here, bottom line is 12 lots all water front developed have huge profit potential. Now not that I know the exact details of the P&S, but I would think that there is a contingency on the purchase of the property pending successful acceptance of subdivision and lot development. Could very well be that agreement has some financial benefit to the current owners to allow the interested party the allotted time to attempt to get all that done. That is the sellers right to make a contractual agreement with such stipulations. So what would you do if you owned this property and there was a few hundred thousand or more on the table if you allowed extra time the process go through?

While it's noble that lots of people may not want this to happen - in typical not in my back yard fashion, mob rule doesn't or shouldn't come into play here. I'm sure a bunch of so called objectors already own property that probably have the same sketchy "historical" value, may have been a place loons could have nested as well, yet how many sleep well at night knowing they have destroyed loon habitat or plowed under some place the Indians used to camp out on (maybe) hundreds of years ago so common that's just grasping at whatever they can to stop this, none of the objections I have read have any reasonable rational behind them.

Far as I'm concerned the owners have every right if they so choose to get what they can out of that property.

Finally the town has zero right to steer via legislative power the proposed sale of any property without due cause. It's got nothing to do with additional tax revenue although as noted the end result is beneficial to both the town and tax payers.

Any one who wants to preserve this property should appeal directly to the current owners.
Even if this is 100% true (a couple of posters have suggested there may still be legal hurdles), that does not mean it is right for the Winchesters to sell to the developer.

An owner is presented with identical prices from two bidders for their land. One bidder will build houses for 12 families, increasing the environmental impact significantly. Another will grant low impact access to hundreds of kids every year, and protect the land forever.

If I were the Winchesters, I think I'd know how I'd want to be remembered.
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to FlyingScot For This Useful Post: