Photos & Videos: Tucker’s Point Walking Tour
[Updated] This afternoon [Mar.6] a group of environmental and social/historical organisations hosted a walking tour of the Tucker’s Point area that will be affected by the Special Development Order [SDO] just passed by the House of Assembly.
Host organisations included the Bermuda Audubon Society, Bermuda National Trust, Bermuda Environmental and Sustainability Taskforce [BEST], Citizens Uprooting Racism in Bermuda [CURB], Greenrock, SOS and Tucker’s Town Historical Society. The tour was set up in a self guided fashion with ‘checkpoints’ along the way.
According to Stuart Hayward, by 4:30pm today, almost two thousand people had turned out for the Tucker’s Point SDO walkabout. All ages from babies in carry-packs and strollers to adults in their eighties. Some took advantage of the electric car-ride offered to get up from Castle Harbour waterside to the hill top; and the free Minibus shuttle from Point 18 back to the carpark area. Others walked all the way.
Small but interested crowds formed around the guides positioned at the numbered stands. Denny Richardson, Dr David Wingate, and Stuart Hayward seemed always surrounded by avid listeners.
On the green overlooking the old cemetery, there was a continuous steady crowd of people listening to a speaker as he recounted some of the history of the area. Cameras and videos aplenty were recording this rare sight of the old cemetery containing some of the graves of the Talbots, Richardsons and others who had been moved out of their old community.
Dr David Wingate commented that an alternative use for the lands would be to turn them to into a National Park dedicated to the memory of the Bermudians who were unfairly evicted from the area. He also commented that one of the problems that the whole development has was that they were building in an area full of some of the hardest and oldest rock in Bermuda. Dr Wingate also said the neccessity to jackhammer for all excavations had driven their costs sky high and that the same would apply to any fresh development.
Earlier today, Tucker’s Point released a statement saying, “We are pleased to welcome members of the Tucker’s Town Historical Society and other concerned Bermudians on their tour of Tucker’s Point today. We embrace the opportunity to give our neighbors a first-hand understanding of the highly responsible way in which we have developed Tucker’s Point. In terms of any future development, we remain committed to safeguarding the environmental and historical integrity of our property. We will continue to protect and enhance bird life, plants and trees, and safeguard the many caves in the woodland areas.”
“We sincerely hope that the members of the Historical Society and others joining the walk benefit from their visit to Tucker’s Point. We hope they will recognize Tucker’s Point’s leadership in establishing new standards of excellence in Bermuda’s tourism industry. We hope, as well, that they will appreciate Tucker’s Point’s environmental stewardship, its continuing green initiatives and its commitment to sustainable development,” concluded the statement from Tucker’s Point.
The SDO was tabled in the House of Assembly on February 4th, 2011, and various groups including BEST, CURB and the Bermuda National Trust spoke out about their concerns, while an online petition gathered over 800 signatures.
Prior to the SDO passing, Dr. David Wingate spoke on his concerns saying: “The vast majority of these lots will be located on what is presently steep and densely wooded hillsides, guaranteeing that it will be impossible to develop them without deforestation and rock excavation to create level terraces for house foundations. A good portion of the land proposed for subdivision and sale or hotel expansion, specifically Paynter’s Hill and Quarry Hill, lies within the ancient Walsingham geologic formation which is riddled with caves and sink-holes and beautiful pinnacle rock formations on the surface.”
In addition to the environmental concerns, CURB condemned the SDO prior to it being passed saying: “Once the home for centuries to a majority of Black Bermudians, and which was forcibly taken away from them, will be the scene of money-making activity yet again, with 78 residences (starting at $3.2M) and 70 hotel rooms being build across the 240-acre site.
The Planning Ministry answered criticisms concerning the environmental impact of the proposed exanpsion at Tucker’s Point, saying “stringent conditions” have been attached to the in-principal approval for redevelopment of the property. Both Minister of Environment, Planning and Infrastructure Strategy Walter Roban and the Minister of Business Development and Tourism Patrice Minors appeared on CITV’s “In the Know” programme to address public concerns regarding the SDO.
In the near-term, Tucker’s Point would develop and sell single units as part of a three-lot subdivision on Glebe Hill in Hamilton Parish and seven single family home sites on Paynter’s Road, South Road and Harrington Sound Road. Tucker’s Point also seeks approval to develop nine sites of single and attached housing on Paynter’s Hill.
The SDO will enable Rosewood Tucker’s Point Resort & Spa to expand its current 100 guest room inventory by 50-70 guest rooms and suites on the adjacent Quarry Hill site. Tucker’s Point’s long-term plan aims to redevelop Whitecrest Hill, which has to date served as the water catchment for the resort, as a Rosewood residential community. .
A statement issued last month by Tucker’s Point said that approval of the SDO was “critical to the financial viability of Tucker’s Point.” The full text of the SDO, and well as maps can be viewed here.
Update March 7: Statement from the Ministry of Environment, Planning and Infrastructure Strategy below:
The Ministry of Environment, Planning and Infrastructure Strategy would like to clarify that the Tucker’s Point Special Development Order (SDO) does not approve development at the site. A number of steps remain before development can begin.
For example, the matter is still under consideration by the legislature. Although the Order (SDO) has been approved by the House of Assembly, it has still to be approved by the Senate before developers can move forward.
Further, If approved by both Houses, then the Order would remove restrictions on the land imposed by the current zonings and thus permit the Developer’s plans to be considered by the Development Applications Board (DAB).
Final Approval for Development would only be granted if the Developer satisfies the DAB that stringent conditions as outlined in the Order have been met.
Photos by Only the Best, click to enlarge:
Read More About
Category: All, Community, Environment, Environment, News, Photos, Videos
Thank you to those who took the tour yesterday and who maintain this protest. I was unable to attend but that in no way reflects an acceptance of this project. I think it is vitally important that the pressure remains on this…now more than ever. Remember the KEMH development in Botannical Gardens was reversed…so I am hopeful that this government will come to its senses and protect this most treasured lot…one which can never ever be replaced or replicated once the first excavator goes through.
Minister Roban – I sincerely hope that the financing falls through on this one. Money seems to be the only catalytic factor in this scenario. Save Castle Harbour.
I second that 411…..
I was amazed to hear that so many people turned out. I couldn’t be there, but it is refreshing to see Bermudians united for a cause. Now, one can only hope that the proposed development will falter at the next decision.
Keep up the heat and stop this greed! I third that 411…
It would be absolutely wonderful if Tucker’s Point could be made a National Park as it
really is a National Treasure, but don’t stop there, every piece of Green Space left in the Islands of Bermuda should in all consciousness be protected from the shear selfishness of certain members in our government, who are, it would seem, so Oblivious to the need to protect such Treasures as Tucker’s Point.
Can this “Issue” be taken to London?
God help Bermuda, may he show this government the right way to do things, and not squander our heritage for the sake of a few dollars.
Found the tour informative and was glad I went. However, I heard the words “I/we don’t know” one time to many from the guides to cause some doubt about just what is going to be developed. Would have preferred concrete evidence. Some areas marked as ‘proposed for development’ appeared to be unfeasible. Despite the uncertainity I would not want to see this land developed at all. Lets continue to press forward to make a change.
Hi Patricia,
Please see my response below. I’ll try to answer any questions you have. Thanks for coming on the walk.
I also couldn’t make it but wanted to.
If only the PLP members who opposed this SDO had voted with their conscience. I spoke to one minister and he confessed that he opposed the SDO and believes Tucker’s Point will be back in 5 years asking for another handout… yet he voted for the SDO against his own beliefs.
This is their 3rd SDO so it’s entirely likely they’ll be back again for a 4th, especially given their erroneous math regarding the perceived economic upside.
If TPC is currently $150m in the hole they’ll need to make a profit of $2m from each new unit sold. On top of that given the additional capital requirements for the addition of a further 70 rooms the numbers just don’t add up (not to mention the monthly bleed of $1m in interest payments).
Having attended the ghost town tour yesterday, the notable absence of any hotel, fractional or residence club guests confirms it’s simply impossible for the hotel to become a success given their current debt obligations and occupancy levels. Rosewood is unfortuntely too little too late.
TPC should be put into receivership (which apparently was a-ok for Pink Beach and Newstead – both of whom are/were owned by Bermudians) with the lenders (HSBC, etc.) writing off the difference on any recoveries. The property itself is in great condition, it just needed better (capable) management from the get go.
+1
Put it into receivership. The project is not viable.
+ another
Here is the handout map from the walk. It shows all the development proposed by the SDO in pale pink with red dotted lines: http://lts.cr/RRv
And this is the interpretive text guide on that was on the back of the map: http://lts.cr/RRx
I was one of the guides on the walk and I’d like to respond to Patricia’s concerns. Firstly the map above is from the SDO, that is what we used for the walk. If volunteers seemed a little unsure how to answer questions it’s because we were just willing community members who had a training the day before. We did our best and could refer questions we couldn’t answer to Dr. Wingate and Stuart Hayward who were towards the end of the route. We organized this in about nine days and it was a true feat of community organizing that I feel lucky to have participated in. If you saw proposed development that looked hard to realise then that would be an excellent question for the developers.
Finally if you conclude that there must be a better way to help the hotel then please contact the 3 independent senators who will likely decide this on March 16th. They are Senator Carol Ann Bassett, Senator Walwyn Hughes, and Senator Joan Dillas Wright.
Numbers-wise, great turnout. Had to be at least a thousand. Well done organizing groups. It shows what can be done when groups are various interests can do in a short time for a common cause.
My only disappointment was the porportional representation of the demographics of Bermuda’s population.
It appears that a sizable section of the population don’t know, don’t care, don’t think enviromental destruction affects them, don’t think anything ouside of their neighbourhood affects them, are too appathetic or just to downright lazy to get involved with causes such as this.
“They’re just trees” Unbelievable!
What will you do when the Island is totally destroyed in every aspect, the Island has been drained of brains, drained of money, drained of people who will fight for a cause? Who will help you then? What will be left to fight for?
Hello Triangle Drifter, I was at the walk yesterday from 2pm to 4.30 pm and my observation was that the Bermudian population was well represented. My estimate
was in the arena of two thousand who walked the trial. I was wondering what section of the population you felt was missing and why you presume to know why they were not present.
Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.
~ Ancient American Indian Proverb
When the last tree has been cut down.
When the last fish has been caught .
When all of our waters are polluted and poisoned.
When all the air is unsafe to breath.
Only then will we realize WE CANNOT EAT MONEY
I keep looking at the Coat Of Arms of Bermuda.
I just can’t get away from the likes of a large Cat, Lion, Feline related.
The old saying “Greedy killed the cat”….irony……………………..
Mr. Butterfield thank you for your response. I am not interested in helping the hotel. All they see are dollars signs and the love of money is the root of all evil. As soon as I find the three independent Senators email addresses I hope to send them my objection to this development.
Toby Butterfield is with BEST etc. The HSBC Butterfield is Philip.
Because of my name, many people think that I’m a man, I think that’s where the confusion is here. It’s true I’m not Mr. Butterfield, nor am I Philip Butterfield at the bank. Interestingly I am not part of BEST either or any of the organizing groups that hosted the walk. I am a supporter of many of them though, especially the Tucker’s Town Historical Society.
Triangle Drifter’s comments above reflect a large part of why many in Bermuda’s population have historically held back from participation in initiatives related to local environmental sustainability. I know from experience as I have been a subject of these sorts of attitudes myself.
His comments and others made by him in various posts, despite his anonymity, reflect a xenophobic, supremacist and denigratory manner that is too often expressed about Bermudians that do not or may not happen to share his views.
His analysis of why a “sizable section of the population” was not there on the walking tour is telling. Since he did not see them or since they did not attend according to his liking to him translates as they must not know any better, are apathetic or lazy. This attitude stinks of a mindset that many in Bermuda swear is non-existent and only a remnant memory of a bygone era, but persons like him give testament to its continuity to this present day.
Could it possible that many Bermudians do know about this issue but instead do not share your view or others like you? Could it possible that many Bermudians do care about this issue but hold a different opinion as to the end result they would like to see? Could it possible that many Bermudians are smart enough to understand this issue and realise that they cannot make a final judgement on the proposed development as there are no building plans, conceptual or otherwise, for them to make their judgement off of?
Could it be that this “sizeable section of the population” never had access to these areas from a ‘green space’ perspective before and have more concern over the issues of environmental sustainability that are occurring in their own backyards? Where are the special interest groups representing these causes or are they just ‘loss causes’ in their minds? Could it be that, although they may be for or against the development as it stands, that they see the need and benefit for developmental type projects such as the one proposed by Tucker’s Point so that they can obtain employment and feed and educate their families? Could hungry belly be ‘clouding’ their minds?
Could it be that many in Bermuda, due to the attitudes of people like yourself Triangle Drifter, associate environmental issues with separatist and elitist views, that in the past have seen them excluded via non-inclusion from participatory processes in these areas, only now to be called upon to protect an area that has long been the bastion of the rich and famous? Is your view and other posters of a vision of man, environment, society and economy working together in balance the only view that you will accept as right and correct and thus all others have a vision of a sustainability paradigm as ignorant and apathetic?
Could it be that some of these people actually have faith in process and in the intelligence of persons like those in Conservation Services, Environmental Protection, Department of Parks, the Sustainable Development Unit, the Planning Department and those members who sit on the Development Application Board and will have to vet the plans (if there are any) in the future?
Because there are some (or many) who may not hold your view as to what their future Bermuda should look like or just did not decide to come or where unable to, you label their image as a destructive one, a dumb one, a poor one and without the wherewithal to fight for righteous causes. Your last statement sums up your mindset! Regardless of what the reality is as to why this “sizeable section” did not turn out, these questions above are all plausible realities as an alternative to the view points you expressed. I wonder how and why you then came to your conclusion…
Thanks David.
I am tired of all of the environmental groups condemning every single project that is proposed. it is all for political purposes.
I find it very interesting that people are so concerned about disrespecting the “displaced people”.
These ‘displaced people” have been “displaced” for many decades – yet why all of a sudden are some people concerned about them? They didnt care where they were displaced to, and what they received for their displacement.
In addition, should we just leave the land there for the displaced people to come and take a picture of? Because most of these ‘displaced people’ cannot afford to buy property in Tucker’s town, cannot afford membership to Tucker’s Point and Mid Ocean, and if we want to be even more blatant, are not even wanted down there.
I think we have to seriously realize that most of these protestors/marchers are coming from a place of insincerity and are being disingenuous.
They are trying to use the plight of the displaced to galvanise support for their anti-government protest…which is pretty much what it is.
Privately many in the PLP will admit that they oppose this development – even people who voted for it in Parliament.
Opposition is not drawn down political lines, it’s just that only those outside the party are voicing their opinions publicly.
Yes, all this work just to be insincere, yes yes that makes so much logical sense. Because everyone in this economy has so much time to waste and so much to gain by being insincere and disingenuous. Talk about drinking too much PLP koolaide. BTW sugar is very bad for you and decreases your immune system function.
Thanks for your views Mr. Chapman. Triangle Drifter’s comments made me very uncomfortable also. I am a white Bermudian and my earliest activism was in environmental issues. It was far too easy for me to innocently draw wrong and damaging conclusions about the black community and I did. I have since learned a lot and I have learned many of the things you point out – the good reasons why black folks may not feel comfortable in the environmental organisations; the fact that they have all kinds of issues on their plates that I could be totally unaware of due to white privilege and the de facto social segragation we still operate in; and on the list goes. There are many highly rational reasons why blacks are not visible in large numbers in enviromental causes. It is sadly far too easy for caring civic minded members of the environmental community and the white community to be oblivious to these things and consequently to draw harmful conclusions. As whites we can with passion ask, “where are the blacks?” and never once think that it may not be right to ask this when we have not ourselves been involved in anti-violence marches, forums on youth issues, calls to improve our public schools, lectures on black history, efforts to support small businesses in Economic Empowerment Zones, mentoring programmes, black church and community events, presentations on institutional racism, and so on. These are the places we have to consistently show up if we want more blacks to be visible in the environmental movement. Not only that I have discovered that they are the places we need to show up if we want to truly know our Island. It is just too easy for us to be unaware that many blacks would rightfully be angry that we are not at those events and in those causes. The ease with which that is so is how racism operates today in 2011. Racism lives and is carried in the unintended blindness that comes with privilege.
Mr. Chapman I agree with you and thank you on all of this but in terms of the SDO I disagree. To me it has not been proven that this will definitely save the hotel, or that it is the only way to save the hotel. Because of this I cannot support it. Too much will be lost, and if we are to lose so much, the reason needs to be stronger. I care very much about jobs too and sadly the way the tourism industry currenty operates, a large number of the jobs are and will be filled by non-Bermudians.
with all due respect to you david, that perhaps mentioning the makeup isnt the right way to think about it, it works both ways. Of the two last marches on parliament recently, the biggest argument against the marches was that of the makeup of the group, and how it looked like a lynch mob..
not saying you agreed with that at the time, but those who are “historically held back from participation” can be just as unethical in their comments too. Something that needs to be worked out by all bermudians.
More spin from the PLP. Great job ‘Chappy’.
Talk about disinformation…………………………
So David , just remind us again … you ARE in favour of the SDO , right ?
(See ,I just saved you all those words ….)
Terry – as far as I know, I hold no position, and never have, in the PLP as a political party, organisation or business, so how you attribute my words as “more spin from the PLP” is ridiculous…but based on your past asinine comments on this forum, it is understandable how you may suffer from a lack of reality. Believe me, you epitomise the quote “A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool because he has to say something”.
Jus Wunderin – if that is what you get from reading my post, then power to you. You can draw your own conclusions as you see fit. This is a public forum. I will let my words expressed here and in other media speak for themselves.
To address the topic of the article directly, I find it interesting as to how most of the areas that these visitors would have seen are not a result of “natural providence” but the result of human landscaping. This seems to be evident from the pictures as well. The majority of trees and woodlands they would have seen while walking would have been composed not of natives and endemics, but of planted ornamentals, Casuarinas, Spice, Mexican Pepper, Fiddlewood and Chinese Fan Palm, these being all invasive trees. Of course, there are also the areas of caves/Walsingham formation and those specific areas that have native stands of woodland which are unique to Bermuda and these should be protected – but how do the attitudes of some who are quoting “Ancient American Indian” proverbs really relate to a paradigm of a Tucker’s Point in the post-Castle Harbour and now golf course layout era. Case in point, I listened to the video and the speaker talking about the caves states despairingly at the end how the cave vegetation has now been left to overgrow whereas during the Castle Harbour Hotel days they were manicured and had lights within them?!? This attitude shows confusion – is the paradigm that is being sought by persons like her one of “wild” or of “managed”? And if this is the information and awareness of ecology that is being used as a basis to be critical of the Tucker’s Point development, I do not believe that it is quite accurate and thus will be less effective in dealing with some issues of ecological sustainability, which is the real key issue at Tucker’s Point.
There also seems to be this recurring suggestion that parts of the land should be turned over due to their connection to the past residences of Tucker’s Town – where then do we stop at this land re-appropriation strategy? I am sure that if one starts digging (excuse the pun), they will find many lands that were appropriated unfairly in Bermuda over the past. There are some obvious examples of persons who have been implicated in the Chinese whispers over past years – do we really want to go down that route as a community?! Some may not like the resulting outcomes.
The comments in the videos and indeed, the public campaign, while very valid as an expression of public sentiment to a cause, seems too replete with emotional pulling points – for example, only now is there concern over the plight of the Richardson’s and Talbots, etc. of the past Tucker’s Town community? Only now is there concern by specific segments of the population over the graveyard holding past enslaved Bermudians? It smacks of being disingenuous. I found it interesting how Mr. Richardson clearly implicates a racist policy of the government at the time of the Tucker’s Town resettlements yet many, including those who seem to be most vocal in the media and on these types of forum somehow are transferring this reality to the current government, and the people who elected them, of the day, either directly or by way of innuendo.
This use of emotionalism as selling point to this issue is exemplified in the post of Bears and Toni above – in reality, how do your words, no matter how beautiful and poetic, actually relate to the paradigm that Bermuda finds itself in? Is the last tree really going to be cut down, the last fish really going to be caught and are our waters really polluted or poisoned and our air unsafe to breath and IF any one of these is true, is Tucker’s Point or, I dare say, the government of the day to blame? Irony, or a very devious strategy of social engineering to gain favor towards social or political gain? I know that many will see these comments as “oh, you are only trying to support the government” but in reality, I honestly am asking, “are we really being sincere with ourselves or just being partial to our own personal, self-centred interests without regard for accuracy or truth?”
Indeed Toni, I agree we must treat the Earth well so that our children can inherit it in all its glory but does this mean a paradigm that would see the Earth in the same stage of development that it was 100 years ago…or 500…or 1000. Where does one draw the line? Where does one say no to the technology that man has developed that allows us to live without many of the diseases that humans suffered, the hunger and malnutrition that was a thousand fold what it is today on a global level and the ability to learn and do more than man has ever been able to? I do not expect anyone to be able to answer these sort of questions with an answer that would satisfy all. However, could it not be possible that man can exist and live in harmony with those parts of the natural environment that we deem desirable to maintain while at the same time altering those that we seek to alter in the same way that a termite will alter the landscape to create a mound or even alter your house to find a food source? How is man different?
This is the dilemma that is faced on a global scale, made all the more difficult in Bermuda due to our socio-political history and the physical and social limitations that result from our small islandness.
Great post David!
“are we really being sincere with ourselves or just being partial to our own personal, self-centred interests without regard for accuracy or truth?”
David – presumably (with this remark) you’re referring to the politicians who support this project? If truth & accuracy were of paramount importance the Government would take a closer look at the facts and conclude that even if this SDO was granted and all 78 home-sites sold TPC would still be deeply in debt and protected reserves permanently erased.
They’ve already been granted two SDO’s and couldn’t make it happen with these significant concessions to public interest. TPC should be put into receivership with the lenders taking a haircut on any losses. You can only take so many bites of the apple.
The concessions went well beyond just the SDOs – Tucker’s Point received pretty massive tax exemptions as well and what amounted to subsidies.
It’d be interesting if Bernews could dig up a full list of the concessions given to TP over the years.
Oh good grief DC, what a load of WAFFLE! A white person can’t say ANYTHING without being labeled disingenuous, insensitive. Why bother?
The issue IS the issue. It has NOTHING to do with race. That is the point in my frustration. The SDO all is about money. It is a bailout or, at the very least a delaying action of the eventual folding of TPC.
This is not the first concession TPC has had which has had the resulting destruction of untouched land, land previously zoned woodland reserve. If you are a private landowner & have the misfortune to have a piece of your lot zoned woodland reserve see how many hoops you have to jump through at planning to be able to build on your land to meet all the setbacks etc.
TPC now has permission, assuming Cabinet is going to cave (sorry), to build all over land zoned woodland reserve. It is just about the minor details of site coverage, most likely as dense as possible & as ugly as the ghost village already erected. All Planning has a say in now is dotting the i’s & crossing the t’s. That is no problem because The Minister can overule Planning. It has happened under this PLP Government before…many times.
The only people who can save, or at least delay, the SDO right now are the independent Senate members, assuming the UBP will vote against it. The PLP Senate members will vote like parrots, doing what their Masters up on the hill behind them tell them to vote.
Dear T Drifter,
You were the one to bring up race so please don’t fault Mr. Chapman for addressing it. For the record I was one of the route volunteers and have put about 50 hours of my own time into this campaign and if I had walked into the meeting of organizers and heard comments like yours I would have left. I am curious what you thought about my earlier post. It is just so easy for white folks to say they don’t see what the big deal is about race and then to get annoyed when the focus stays on it. These are average people who can have all the right intentions to be fair-minded good citizens but have inherited a viewpoint that has huge gaps and insensitivity in it. Everything can look racially resolved and fair to them. I like to use this analogy. A white person can innocently say “Why do we have to keep talking about race?” and this is like a cactus in the desert turning to a daisy and saying, “Why do we have to keep talking about the weather?” The cactus can be a kind caring cactus and still ask this because it does not see all the background climatic factors that support it over the daisy. I can highly recommend spending a few years learning from the daisies.
Toby, with respect you had better go back over the posts & see exactly who was the first person to use black & white terms in this issue.
I tried to tiptoe through the tulips & be as politically correct as possible voicing my dismay at seeing the largest group in our population so poorly represented at what to you & me is an issue that is anything but racial.
I made an obsevation that must have been noticed by hundreds. I had the nerve/stupidity to voice it &, not surprisingly, from DC get a personal attack for it. Being an experienced troll, he launches into a long rambling disertation making possible excuses then asserts that the various Government bodies will deal with the SDO & all will be well. We should trust them. How bout it Toby? Feel the trust?
Again the walk was an excelllent turnout. I just wish it had been 3000 instead of 1000 folks of all walks of life walking together.
Hopefully the Cabinet grounds will be packed to capacity in a couple weeks time.
i was a bit put off about the comments regarding the “over growth” on the caves too…. do you want it natural? or managed? and at what point to do go from light grass cuttings to a large concrete entrance? one or the other. Im just sick of new development in bda.
Scott I can see how you and Mr. Chapman were concerned about the possible mixed message here. I was trained by Dr. David Windgate to be one of the route volunteers and the purpose of the walk was 1) to show with maps etc. the areas that would be released to development under the SDO 1) to educate about the ecological, geological and historic features of the land and how the SDO would likely impact them and 3) to show where relevant the type of land stewards the Tucker’s Point has been to date. The 3rd point is a minor one but it covered things like what has been built under the first 2 SDOs as well as how the hotel has failed to highlight some of the incredible natural features of the property. The Church Cave comments were coming from that point of view. It was previously a true eco-tourism feature because you could see into the cave from the road above. TP has allowed runaway non-native vegetation to block the view and prevented visitors and locals from appreciating the cave. Obviously the overall concern is that of ecological loss but responsible eco-tourism would promote viewing of the natural assets of that land and would indirectly support the cause of preservation.
Mr. Chapman,
The photos are misleading in terms of what ‘greenery’ was the focus of the walk. You obviously are very knowledgable and will be relieved to know that no one was encouraged to dispair about the loss of landscape-style vegetation. It was the large tracts of wooded hillsides that were the focus, those you obviously know, Quarry Hill, Paynter’s Hill, White Crest (or Catchment) Hill, and Glebe Hill. This can be seen clearly in the link to SDO maps given at the foot of the article above. These hills with their high and rare concentrations of native vegetation and birdlife are all entirely or partially threatened by the SDO. I’m sure you would have found the walk interesting. I’m sorry though if your being there would have meant to having to hear any comments like those of Triangle Drifter in this thread. I was grateful to have heard little of that.
“I do not expect anyone to be able to answer these sort of questions with an answer that would satisfy all. However, could it not be possible that man can exist and live in harmony with those parts of the natural environment that we deem desirable to maintain while at the same time altering those that we seek to alter in the same way that a termite will alter the landscape to create a mound or even alter your house to find a food source? How is man different?”
Well supposedly man has a brain.
“you are only trying to support the government”.
As for holding a position et al…surely you jest. As for being a “fool” thats just typical of you and your ‘associates’ and I am wise and I have a voice and you sir are not going to stop me, rest assured.
@ Tryangle…….there’s two sides to each story. You only have three.
Gonna bump you up. Your now a square. Congratulations.
Now off to Castle Harbor or whatever they it nowadays to pick up balls from the cemetary. Disrepect then, sell out now.
Money, wonder who’s face we will see on it in 20 years.
I found this telling perspective in one of the postings on the BEST petition site which reads as follows:
I am an owner at Tucker’s Point and feel
that the proposed plan will seriously degrade
the natural habitat that remains.
I must also note that when we purchased
at Tucker’s, several years ago, it was implied
that there would be no more development
than that showing on the “Master Plan”.
If the planned development is implemented,
the values that we bought into will be so
seriously eroded that I might seriously consider leaving an island that I have loved
for over 50 years.
I wonder if that is the prevailinng view amongst the TPR clientele!
PROGRESS ITS IMPORTANT!! NO ONE EVER CARE ABOUT TUCKERS TOWN, AS PEOPLE SAY FOR THE RICH AND FAMOUS, SO LET IT BE!!!
CREATE MORE WORK FOR BERMUDIANS!! GOOD JOB GOVERMENT!!
What part of we are in a building glut do you not understand? We have condos both luxury and normal, homes both luxury and normal, fractional units, and office space ALL EMPTY. Building for the sake of building on a 22 square mile island is so dumb. It shows many just how shortsighted the people in charge have been. Did they actually think we could just go on building with all the projects that have gone on since the “building boom”. We have had enough, its time to look for a real solution for job creation for Bermudians. And if you think that foreign help will not be hired to build something of this size, then you are sorely mistaken, that’s what they always say.
Well, apparently my simple comment about Mr. Chapman is being ‘moderated’.
A question was asked, thats all……..
Oh well…..
Guys, I too wondered about the very obvious demographics at the walk.
Isn’t it nice to be able to talk about this on this forum?
I jumped to no conclusions as to why it was so swayed one way, and now I have read your comments above I am a little closer to understanding. Thanks to Bernews for creating this open table discussion. I have no interest in name calling or racism, just want to know why these things happen, so I can have a clearer answer to explain to my children when they ask.
Thanks Pat, thanks forum contributors (both good and bad at heart!) and thanks Bernews.
to my two cents:
its not your property, so don’t worry about it!
econony is low all over the world, but if you invest in bad times to keep things going that’s good, when better times come we already have it and don’t need to build in a rush!!! people need to continue to work, when it being built it will take 4 to 5 years and hopefully the world econony i better!!
@ Build, this is why people like you just look stupid to educated people that actually care about the environment. Let me see if you can possibly understand this. BUILDING ON THAT LAND AFFECTS THE ENTIRE ISLAND. Biology basics now read carefully, THE ENTIRE ECOSYSTEM OF THE ISLAND IS AFFECTED when you clear this land. Do you understand? Do you need to go back to biology class?
And let us not forget, THE LAND WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT ON.
THIS IS TUCKERS THIRD SDO for land that was supposed to be protected.
This “when better times come we already have it and don’t need to build in a rush!” statement is HILARIOUS! Do you live here in Bermuda?
If you did, you would know that when times were good BERMUDA WAS BUILDING, BUILDING, BUILDING, so much so that we are in a building glut! Now, they are sticking with the same old model to create jobs at the expense ruining your island.
WHY aren’t they building hotels were there are piles of rubble from demolished ones? That could create jobs, and guess what the land has ALREADY been destroyed so nobody gives a crap if they build there!!!