Well finally a decision on the former Rogers school building. Oh yeah the Oxford on too. There will be a meeting held August 28, 2014 to make the decisions on what to do.
If not the beginning of the end, certainly perhaps the end of the beginning.
Each site has its separate little quirks. Each of the quirks has to be dealt with. The fundamentals however do need to be decided upon.
Seems the RFP process as teetered back to the front runner.
Biggest hurdle for an RFP, or a broker sale, or an auction, or any other creative method someone wishes to dream up is deciding just what are we going to sell. Yes, this does indeed apply to both properties.
Oxford has the matter of paper streets abutting, and a former fire station, now head quarters for an organization in town. Rogers has Union Street on paper running through it, not to mention the town utilities covered by that paper street. Proponents, some that is, are advocating slicing off some additional length to create space for parking for the new proposed tenant.
If you don't know what you are going to sell, and if you don't get the proper permission to sell it, i.e. Town Meeting, how do you appraise and advertise?
Decide what you are willing to part with. Dot the i's and cross the t's on the legal framework. Just do it.
Of course hand in hand with what amount of land, is what restrictions are going to be imposed.
Myself personally, I say give the committee every single restriction it wants. Every single one. Add the performance "bonds" recommended by the consultant. Want to give them the land?
Well up to Town Meeting. Assuming nothing else would restrict the "sale" on the additional land. go to do some research at some point. There is this nagging in the back of my mind about land issues that had to be resolved back some time ago when dealing with the play ground.
Interesting question arises from that though. Consensus, at least smart money consensus is putting out an RFP with the proposed restrictions would essential result in little to no money to the town. At this point just unloading the building is a benefit.
Does adding the equivalent of a buildable lot to the land mass affect that? It certainly means, as far as I am concerned, you throw the town further into the red on the matter, but hey what's a few dollars more.
Anyway ... Add the restrictions, add the land; and, make it perfectly clear that this is a one shot RFP with restrictions.
To that end, when you get to the TM you will need to sell, get the money you need to advertise the RFP properly.
As far as Oxford, let's save us the arguing and the pain. Subdivide the land, carve out what you need to for the fire station. It is going to be want happens anyway. Then sell it.
One way or another, decision will be made and soon. Finally, something everyone can be happy about, at least until the decisions are made.
Okay ... if you were expecting something on the pot plant, here it is.
Option 2 is not going were proposed. It is now proposed to go where Option 1 was proposed to go. Everyone gets another kick at the can when Option 2 goes before the planning board at some point to get a special permit like Option 1 had to.
Best line of the night though came from the comparison of Option 2 to the solar farm on the dump. If people thought the pot plant, whatever option would be as unobtrusive as the solar farm, would we even be having the discussion?
I am still for the pot plant. Would and do support it at the Option 1 now Option 2 location, subject to state and local approval of course. I support the implementation of the law. Let's face it though, this isn't going to be like the solar farm. The impact, financially and otherwise is going to be just a tad different.
Anyway ... every sale has to have a pitch right?
Anyone have any bright ideas out there for anything? I for one feel like the hamster on the wheel in the cage. Still, if that wheel stops spinning.
Enough for today.