March 2, 2016
Board of
Directors
Eastman
Community Association
P. O. Box 53
Grantham, NH
03753
Dear Board Members,
I first purchased
in Eastman in 1984. I left in 2000 for a two year employment opportunity in
Scotland. When I returned I purchased my current residence at 2 Winding Wood
Road in late 2002, when special places were still special. For those of you who
don’t know, this is in the Spring Glen Special Place.
I was notified of the relocation
and construction of the new VDE office building in late October by a man who
was walking by my house. He told me that the Springfield Planning Board had
just approved the plan to build the new office on the merged lot abutting my
property. I asked why it wasn’t going up next to the maintenance garage and he
said that there wasn’t enough room because of an easement issue. I thought it
was odd that this was the first I heard of it being an abutter and all. I said
if I couldn’t see it from my house I didn’t care. He assured me I wouldn’t.
Imagine my surprise when they
clear cut 70% of the lot. I already live with the traffic on the access road to
Springfield and the noise from the pickle ball court which will now be even
louder due to the clear cutting. Now, not only will I see the building and
lighted multi car parking lot, but also the dwelling across the street which I
have never seen before in 13 plus years. And this new view of a modular 2 story
building on a slab can be seen from 5 of my 7 rooms, 1 of my bathrooms and my
entire deck. Two people on the Eastman Environmental Committee told me they
were told to stand down in this case. You would have thought that the board was
smart enough to insist that the VDE follow EEC regulations to ensure buffer
zones etc. as part of giving them the easement.
I sought legal counsel after
appearing at a Springfield Board of Selectmen’s meeting. The Concord law firm
told me unfortunately what the ECA board had done was legal, albeit very Sleazy. He said that the perpetual easement was done instead of a sale to
circumvent a change of use from rural residential to commercial which would
require a variance and need abutters’ approval and also not trip the Retired
Lot Program which requires abutters right of first refusal for retired lots.
Frustrated I went back and reviewed the BOD meetings and
found that at the BOD on October 26th Mr. Paul Hoffman voiced objections to
granting the perpetual easement as it was contrary to the lot retirement
program. Mr. Ryder replied the lot retirement program allows retired property to
be used in the best interest of the community. Let’s examine that statement.
1. The general fund received no money for the merged lot.
Had it been offered to an abutter (me) it would have received at least
$6,200.00. Best for the community, I think not.
2. The VDE has to float a municipal bond for $250,000.00
for construction of the facility. Municipal bonds have to pay interest yearly
for the life of the bond. Where will the money come from, the customers,
through increased water and sewer rates to cover an expense that is an increase
to their operating budget.
3. I talked to 2 of our leading real estate brokers about
what this will do to property values. Both said it will have an adverse effect
on the abutters and that a rippling effect will occur in the neighborhood. Now
I’m sure this will have no effect on Mr. Goldman’s residence on the 7th
green but it will affect a portion of Spring Glen properties. Best for the
community, again, I think not.
Maybe Mr. Ryder needs a post graduate course in economics
to understand that an increase in the operating budget and reduced real estate
values are not in the best interest of the community.
Did any of you even drive down to the site to see what
impact there might be on the abutters before you voted?
The VDE has been operating in 300 square feet for twenty
years. Reasonably intelligent people know they could run this operation from a
store front at Rum Brook. To erect a 2200 square foot facility is overkill.
In closing I would like to say to the 3 new BOD’s who ran
on inclusion and change that, in my opinion, you failed miserably with one of
your first votes.
And I would like all you to consider if you would have
voted yes if this was next to your property. I think not.
Regards, Mike
Downes
603-359-5682
They say they have done nothing illegal which is what was said on Wall Street in 2008. Did we think the bar was higher than that? Not on Wall Street and not at Eastman.
No comments:
Post a Comment