February 18, 2009
Memories Over Housing in Rocky Point
Even with the market sag, housing is still relatively expensive in Rhode Island, and part of what led to our being hit so hard in the subprime collapse was residents' inability to find suitable housing within their means, and the lack of in-state competition for property owners probably raises the threshold of taxation "price" tolerance in any given community. What to do? How about we devote ever-more-limited public funds to taking land off the RI market in the name of nostalgia and open-space aesthetic:
The state Department of Environmental Management wants to acquire a portion of the former Rocky Point amusement park that had been set aside for private development and preserve it as open space.DEM Director W. Michael Sullivan yesterday successfully asked the State Properties Committee for permission to begin surveying and appraising the roughly 82 acres that developers have been eyeing for luxury housing. Sullivan said he hopes to create an expansive coastal state park by coupling the land with the 41-acre shoreline portion of the old amusement park that was acquired by the city and state last year. ...
"Even though I grew up in Massachusetts, I did have the opportunity to go there," he said. "And like most people, when I stand there, I still can hear the laughter and have an overwhelming sense of times gone by.
"This is a legacy and an opportunity that we should not forgo without giving a final effort," Sullivan said.
God forbid we actually preserve open space, once again, the right wing on the side of the greedy developers
Posted by: Tim at February 18, 2009 1:45 PMThe public's access to Narraganstt Bay is what is behind the effort to aquire a portion of the land. That would serve many more people than just the private developer and the future occupants of luxury waterfront homes.
Posted by: Phil at February 18, 2009 5:07 PMActually Phil, the public will already have access to the Bay by virtue of the City of Warwick owning 41 acres of shoreline at Rocky Point. The land the state is talking about is the "back portion" of the property.
Posted by: Marc at February 18, 2009 9:45 PMMarc
Posted by: Phil at February 19, 2009 8:49 AMI did not know that.
No prob, Phil. Here's a story on it. Happened in December 2007.
http://www.pbn.com/stories/29022.html
Posted by: Marc at February 19, 2009 11:05 AM