So Newbury has received approval to sell that land they have just lurking around, unused, on Plum Island. Well, part of it, at any rate. There are still a few lots here and there that I assume they can sell for development, or whatever.
What's great is that voters will only allow sale to "governmental entities and non-profit land conservation organizations." Not sure how many non-profit organizations have $5 mil lying around in their coffers, though.
This is from our daily (I just copied the whole piece, since it's short):
NEWBURY — Selectmen can sell a large tract of town-owned Plum Island land, but only under several restrictions, Town Meeting voters decided last week.
By a 77-15 tally, voters approved an article last Tuesday night that would allow the Board of Selectmen to offer a 5.4-acre parcel on Temple Boulevard for sale to "governmental entities and non-profit land conservation organizations." Selectmen Chairman Vincent Russo has estimated the value of the property at more than $5 million.
But voters also approved an amendment proposed by island resident Scott Ackerly that would require Town Meeting authorization before any sale could actually be executed and would also prohibit the town from selling the beachfront and primary dune portions of the land.
Ackerly said he wanted to preserve public access in an area where much of the beachfront is privately owned.
"This is the only piece of property that the town of Newbury owns that guarantees that the people of Newbury can use this beach," he said.
Russo later disputed that statement, contending the town owns the beach from the Newburyport-Newbury line to the border of the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge.
The parcel town officials want to sell is on the northerly border of the refuge.
Finance Committee Chairman Frank Remley said the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is conducting an appraisal with an eye toward adding the land to the wildlife sanctuary.
Does this exclude a waste treatment plant? Because that's all we need out here.
Hmmmm ... shall I be picky, or no? OK, you talked me into it.
Is Russo an appraiser? I thought he was a doctor! And what's the deal with reporting something that happened nearly a week ago? Which, of course, has not stopped me from commenting on it.
Anyway, I'm not sure what that Ackerly guy is on about. As I understand it, none of the beach is privately owned. I'm always rampaging all over it and no one yet has told me to cease and desist.
Seriously, though, I'm all for adding onto the refuge. I'm not sure all our plover-tastes-like-chicken friends will agree, though.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
That land is essentially part of the Refuge as is - though obviously selling it to the Refuge prevents any future development.
A plover isn't much of a meal....
I thought tiny little birds were very haute cuisine.
Perhaps, but they tend to fall off the spit when roasted over an open driftwood and beach grass fire.
Plus the beach grass gives the meat that yucky after taste ...
Check this document out.
http://www.fws.gov/news/historic/1945/19450918.pdf
So ... finally a place to graze my herd of dairy cows?
At least they were right about the Canada geese ... if not about the value of the land.
Thanks, Bubba! I'll keep reading.
Just discovered your blog. For clarification on beach ownership - property lines extend further onto the beach than presumed by most people - especially at high tide. This issue has been made obvious with the easements required for the beach nourishment project.
regards- the Ackerly guy
Post a Comment