Tucker’s Point Responds To BEST’s Concerns
Tucker’s Point have responded to concerns raised by the Bermuda Environmental Sustainability Taskforce [BEST] about their application to develop on Glebe Hill.
In response to BEST’s concerns, Kevin M. Cross, Member of the Executive Committee of Castle Harbour Ltd said: “Tuckers Point Real Estate is pleased to announce that it is moving forward with steps as required by the Special Development Order ["SDO"] granted to Tuckers Point in 2011.
“As part of the rigorous requirements of the SDO, an application has been made to the Department of Planning for the subdivision of lots on Glebe Hill, Hamilton Parish.
“The application is the first step for the Glebe Hill development of three residential lots and subdivides one existing parcel into six additional lots; three for residential use as provided for in the SDO, one for a boundary adjustment, and two non-developable amenity lots.
“Development of the properties is controlled by the SDO, the Bermuda Plan 2008 Planning Statement, the Department of Planning, public access to the application plans, the objection process, and finally the Design Review Board.
“The application submitted is to request planning permission to sub-divide and is not for development. Subdivision of lots is the first step in the application process.
“Subdivision of the SDO parcels is the key component of Tucker’s Point donation of 41 acres to the Bermuda Government, the largest donation of private land in the history of Bermuda. Without subdivision of the SDO parcels, donation of the 41 acres is impossible.
“As part of this subdivision application, theoretical topographical information has been provided showing the maximum extent of cut and fill on the part of the lots that may be developed. At the time of submission of an application to develop homes, complete architectural and topographical plans will be provided.
“The location of and plans to construct homes have not been developed at this time. In addition, other studies, as required by the SDO, will be provided to the Department of Planning to assess the proposed development in full compliance with the SDO and the 2008 planning statement.
“When permission is requested to develop the lots, Tucker’s Point will demonstrate that the proposed homes will be in keeping with the Bermuda image and that the homes will sit comfortably on the site with cut and fill requirements kept to a minimal, similar to many hillside developments in Bermuda,” concluded Mr Cross.
Read More About
Category: All, Environment, News
Comments (30)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Articles that link to this one:
- OBA’s Fahy: ‘Biggest Loser Is Bermuda’s Environment’ | Bernews.com | August 31, 2012
Seriously, is the dude making threats?
The “gift” of the 41 acres was given as sweetner to get the SDO, now it’s being held as a threat to get the further subdvisions. Are they for real? Outrageous greed!
“When permission is requested to develop the lots, Tucker’s Point will demonstrate that the proposed homes will be in keeping with the Bermuda image and that the homes will sit comfortably on the site with cut and fill requirements kept to a minimal, similar to many hillside developments in Bermuda,” concluded Mr Cross.”
Right… and in the process destroying many acres of some of the only natural Bermuda habitat we have left, in order to create homes that we don’t need, and won’t be able to sell.
Come on Mr. Wiggin! How else is Tucker’s Point supposed to generate a profit if they don’t keep building residential units to sell…surely not throgh their year-round fully occupied hotel!?!
… but all the lots have already sold—for prices exceeding $1.3 million (land only). Someone needs a fact check.
So a company that is so far in debt and unable to even sell off all their current properties from that monstrous development, thinks that borrowing more money to build more properties that they won’t be able to sell, while also destroying some of Bermuda’s last undeveloped land, is the best idea? Idiots.
they are drinking the same kool aid as the PLP……….after all, the Atlantic development is such a success and a fine example of how to take (wreck) pristine valuable open space/parkland overlooking the beautiful South Shore / Atlantic Ocean to build condos that have not sold – but hey!!! lets keep building em anyway!!@!@#$%%^
Why is there this misconception that Tucker’s Point hasn’t sold their homes? That couldn’t be further from the truth; in fact, all of their existing homes and condos have sold, and many of the SDO lots are either in contract or have closed.
Yes, the company is in debt, but for other reasons entirely.
Really , without an EIA being done they have already sold to people? That was a mistake.
On the new lots covered by the SDO, Tucker’s Point are asking potential buyers to put down a refundable deposit which would go towards the purchase of a house when Planning approval is received. The buyer must pay for the construction of the house and the cost of the land.
The donation of land to the country agreed in return for getting an SDO is dependent on the right to sell the land on which the SDO allows houses to be built (which must comply with Planning’s rules and require individual approval). Otherwise they would not have agreed to donate the land. The subdivision plans are just the first step in a well laid out process.
Headline should read:
PLP CHANGES RULES SO RICH WHITE EXPATS CAN BE BAILED OUT (Never Mind About The Rest Of Us).
Really, what is the monster mess on south shore that no one lives in, please tie that to the white man, we all are paying for that PLP mistake.
Those units you refer to were I believe built by GL Construction, which is owned by a white guy (Portuguese Bermudian), who has done a lot of Government work since 1998. I’d be astonished if he lost money on any of his work and that goes for any silent partners he might have had too.
Dig a bit deeper, look at who funded a huge portion of the wrecking of south shore, I know who built it, but guess who funded it?
Why don’t you tell us?
GL also built the hugely successful lots at Loughlands! They sold quickly! Why , a better design and people feel SAFE there! THese condos were a bad idea (a PLP idea) from the start. But…like everything else the public, the enviromentalists and oppositions concerns were ignored because they won’t be told what to do! GL did not build these units and then dump them on us??? He was hired by government to build them because THEY thought it was a good idea! Where are those PLP decision makers now???? In hiding so that they cant be questioned and have a negative impact during the next election. Don’t blame GL. He was hired and did his job – on time – on budget as requested. How about we talk about Proactive / Berkeley project, cruise ship peir, TCD contract , T-Street Development? What????? Nobody wants to????
And yes I do know that Loghlands was a governement idea, or GLs ideas taken to Gov. I didnt say they never had ANY okay ideas.
Yup – the PLP is known for helping out Whitey…oh wait or is it Brown???
Where were all you good people when south shore was ruined by the slums government build, and the gas station we had to have, don’t get me wrong I agree with saving all the land we possibly can, but on a positive side, if Tuckers builds it it will be tasteful, and bring some capital to the island, which is something NO ONE in our present Government is capable of.
Steering clear of Dr. Brown and his gang…not even his own could that posse.
BEST tried to stop the mess on South Shore, now they are trying to stop the mess at Tucker’s Point.
As a local property owner I would never be cut the slack that this developer has already gotten from the Planning regulations. Thus, I am very hostile to their bully tactics to squeeze more and more out of Bermuda.
Is there not any Bermudians qualified to do Kevin Cross’s job of insulting Bermudian culture and the Bermuda environment and Bermudians in general?
Yes, they’re called the PLP govmint.
I will say it again, only idiots are building in this economic climate. They deserve all the debt coming their way.
Well, this whole thing sounds bass-ackward to me. The Lots are already sold, which then will probably result in bullying of the Planning Department to agree to the quarry-face cut and fill work that must be done in order to safely build these homes, so that Tucker’s Point doesn’t default on the land sale.
Yesterday, BEST said, “The public should note that the developer seems to be attempting — in this the very first application since the granting of the SDO — to side-step the “stringent conditions” by a) claiming that the conditions do not apply to this application, b) claiming that the site is not a sufficiently “environmentally sensitive area” to require the studies set out in the “stringent conditions”, and c) claiming there are no caves in the area, without having conducted or documented the studies that would verify such a claim.
The first concern ((a) above) has already been shown to be accurate, based on Mr. Cross’ statement that “The application submitted is to request planning permission to sub-divide and is not for development.” We will have to be very vigilant in this climate of non-transparency to ensure that concerns (b) and (c) do not come to pass.
If it is possible, it would be in the best interests of the country for an independent entity to conduct a study verifying the existence, or not, of caves in the area. Personally, I would be very surprised if there were no caves to be found there, as that whole area is riddled with caves.
I am sure they are in a rush to break ground before there is a change of government.
All contracts may become null and void with a new Gov.
The developers want to make a “dent” in the land so if they are told to stop they will be at apoint of no return.The damage would have already been done to the landscape and might as well move forward.
I’m willing to bet that none of the commentators on this site have ever read the conditions of the SDO granted to Tuckers Point.
Some of us HAVE read the conditions, Laverne, and can point out three problems:
1) At least five of the “conditions” aren’t conditions at all, but requirements for studies — studies whose results should have been known in order to craft the conditions (cart well before horse)
2) Most of them are weak, rather than “stringent”, and collectively have many gaps that would have been uncovered by the Environmental Impact Assessment that should have been done, but wasn’t.
3) Tucker’s Point is already trying to sidestep several conditions, claiming that they don’t apply to the subdivision.
You can continue to applaud the conditions but they are already showing to be worth far less than was claimed.