COMMENTS OF THE LOT COMMITTEE 2005

During the fall and winter of 2004-5 a committee was formed (Terry Segal (chairman), Chuck Everett, Sheryl Ellis, Arthur Socolow, Donna Kramich, and Lyman Morrill) and was charged with exploring the Association's options with respect to the parcel know as the Corner Lot. Here are their individual opinions as well as a draft of the meeting summarizing the committee's work prepared by Chairman Segal

Note: to accommodate the limitations of HTML as well as my own time I have made minor formatting changes to some committee members comments.

Apologies;
your Webmaster

Terry Segal Chairman

Dear Deanne,

I suggest you take an informal poll by mail to see if there is solid sentiment for selling the Witham Street lot.

From the work of our committee, I believe the lot is a buildable lot which could be sold for between $350,000-$500,000.

I would vote for the sale, and would recommend the sale proceeds be used to pay the annual operating expenses of the Association and that the Association decide what to do with the balance of the proceeds, ie. set up a fund for possible litigation involving the defense of beach rights, give some money to a local non-profit such as the Sawyer Library, hospital, etc.

If the lot is not sold, I believe we should spend the money to erect a decent sign on it indicating it is the gateway to Brier Neck and also pay to have someone maintain it.

The majority of my committee feels differently, and should be given an opportunity to succinctly state why we should keep the lot.

If the mail poll produces a strong sentiment for a sale, I suggest we then sit down and devise the mechanics for placing the question of a sale before the annual meeting.

Sincerely, Terry Philip Segal

Chuck Everett 4/27/05

Dear Deanne:

You have asked me to express my thoughts regarding the prospect of selling the vacant lot owned by the Brier Neck Association currently under consideration.

I am in favor of selling the lot because I think continued ownership serves no basic useful purpose for the membership of the Association as a whole. Meanwhile, the costs of maintaining the property, while not sizable, are being funded annually by the BNA members (who incidentally consist of only approximately two thirds, not all, of the residents of the Brier Neck area.) Rather than hold tightly to a valuable asset and pay the taxes and liability insurance, I would much prefer to otherwise invest the capital in a more productive venture for the greater benefit of our community.

Since I see no reason to keep the lot, let me comment on the reasons I have heard to do so.

The reason most frequently articulated is to maintain control of the lot's development, not only to prohibit commercial development but apparently residential use as well.

Current zoning of the lot permits only residential use, and I would be in favor of utilizing the lot for a residence for which it and all the other Brier Neck lots were originally laid out and which appear to be best suited. Although there is a chance that permission for a commercial venture on that corner might be granted by the ZBA, I would like to see a definitive legal opinion as to whether the Association could build a restriction into the deed that would make that impossible or very difficult. Furthermore, this lot, though technically a Brier Neck property, is more strategically aligned with the other three corner lots at the Witham St.- Thatcher Rd. intersection which is currently used or prospectively will be used for commercial purposes. (Amelia's Restaurant, housing for the sewer and other utility controls, and a yet to be confirmed commercial use for the Salah corner.)

Maintaining an "open space", a commendable goal of conservationists and opponents of suburban sprawl, is also given as a reason for keeping the lot vacant.

In my view, the conserving of "open space" makes sense if it a sizable piece of land, has a significant natural or historical element or is located in the center of the community which it will serve, but a quarter acre lot at a busy intersection does not meet those criteria. (In fact the several conservation organizations that were approached by members of our Committee showed little or no interest in the protection of the lot.). That being said, I do respect the interests and feelings of those few who directly or nearly abut the lot and who would prefer to see the lot left vacant. This may be one of those situations, however, where the desires of a few become overwhelmed by the benefits to the community as a whole.

Others oppose the sale on the basis that the vacant lot at the entrance to the area enhances the visual view of Brier Neck as a community and indirectly has a positive effect on the property values of the members.

Again, referring to my comments above on the overall impression a visitor might have of the intersection, it is hard for me to visualize the area as being a grand entrance to a planned development of some substance even with a tasteful sign on the lot. A house with a nicely landscaped yard would certainly enhance rather than detract from the overall appearance of the entrance.

Finally, from time to time there has been some interest in creating recreational facilities or reserving the lot for that purpose. Tennis courts are most frequently mentioned but just as frequently discarded for lack of interest. Since we are basically a beach community, the size and location of the lot within the community would further suggest that recreational development of the lot is unlikely.

The formation of the Brier Neck Association had a very basic purpose: to create an organization through which all its elected members could enjoy the benefits of the extraordinary neighborhood beach while preserving the property and other rights of those residents whose properties included the private beach. Admittedly, events have overtaken the full execution of that purpose, but the goal remains: to provide an opportunity for the members to enjoy a private beach. At the same time we look for opportunities to enhance the benefit of residing in the Brier Neck community with social activities and with the satisfaction that we are contributing at least in a limited way to community outreach.

In conclusion, it would be my recommendation to sell the lot with whatever safeguards are legally possible to prohibit or limit commercial development in the future and to contribute a significant portion of the proceeds to one or more of our local non-profit community institutions.

In my opinion,, having enjoyed the run up of property values since purchasing the Spates property, we are in a very good position to make a major contribution to the Gloucester community at a very propitious time with no out of pocket cost to us personally. Our local institutions, including the Sawyer Library about to embark on a very ambitious but badly needed addition, Addison Gilbert Hospital which is fighting for its financial life as a fully functioning medical facility, and the Gloucester School system desperately in need of outside financial support in the face of draconian cuts in its budget in the face of state and federal demands for improved performance.

I do believe that at some point in the not too distant future there will be an attempt to make private beaches open to the public. This will be a major battle which will likely be very costly to defend, and we may lose in the end. If we feel that we will want to defend private ownership of the beach, we might want to reserve some of the lot sale proceeds for that purpose.

I appreciate your asking me to comment on my position. I look forward to further discussion and a satisfactory and equitable resolution for the benefit of the Brier Neck and Gloucester communities.

       With kind regards,

        Richard Everett III

Sheryl Ellis 4/29/2005

As a BNA board member, it is my considered opinion that a sale of the corner lot is neither desirable nor necessary. The proposal to sell at this time is inconsistent with the Association's mission, form the time it originally purchased the parcel in the 1970's through to the present day: retaining ownership of this land is the only means to have a stake in its future use or non-use. I have no sense from the members that the funds apportioned from the annual dues to pay parcel expenses are inappropriate. I support the suggestion that the lot needs esthetic improvement with a planting and/or sign, since is is truly the gateway to the neighborhood. On a persona level, as one of two households who would be most acutely affected by sale and development of the lot, I am seriously opposed. I would anticipate extreme personal hardship if somehow construction were permitted on the lot. Moreover, I feel very strongly that open space in the Good Harbor Beach area must be conserved whenever possible.

As members of Terry Segal's committee exploring options for the lot, Donna Kramich and Sheryl Ellis researched many avenues available to property owners which provide tax relief and restrict its use. Unfortunately the lot's size and character do not meet the criteria for conservation restriction under official guidelines established by Chapter 184 of the Massachusetts General Laws. By this definition, a qualifying parcel must consist of at least 10 acres, limiting its use to protect specified conservation values including the natural, scenic, or open condition of the land. Therefore, should a consensus of the BNA membership decide at some future time that property taxes on the lot are unaffordable but wish to restrict development, a community-based solution would have to be achieved, either by an official City decision or by forming a less formal civic partnership.

Arthur Socolow 4/25/05

I strongly am in favor of keeping the lot with the proviso of maintaining it and dressing it up with an appropriate sign and plantings. I offer to contribute to a "lot maintenance fund."

Thanks for the opportunity to comment.

Donna Kramich 4/22/05

I am very firm in my standing that I want the lot to remain as "open space", that is, "unsold." I think Lyman Morrell has stated it perfectly. The only way to control it is to own it!! Ideally, yes, I would love to see something beautifying the spot, such as flowers, a sing, "Welcome to Brier Neck", etc. I feel that the $175 a year that we pay as dues to the association is not a lot of money. I would not be against raising the dues to bring in more income. It is my belief that many other association members would agree with me.

I did forget to mention that I sent out several letters to non-profit organizations explaining our situation with the lot and forwarded tax bills and plot plans to them, along with a map of Brier Neck. There was no interest on the part of any of them. It is just too small and not really connected to anything of value. Essex County Greenbelt actually came out and looked at the lot. I reported this info to the Lot Committee when we met at Terry Segal's last January.

Lymann Morrill 3/28/05

Dear Deanne,

I am writing in response to an open letter that Terry Segal sent to you on March 18, 2005. In that letter he suggests that you, as president of the BNA, take an informal poll by mail to see if there is solid sentiment for selling the Witham Street lot (BNA owned lot at corner of Witham Street and Thatcher Road). Terry states that he is in favor of selling the lot, and invites discussion of the issue. I oppose the sale of that lot for reasons discussed below.

Brier Neck, Salt Island, and Good Harbor Beach together form one of the most beautiful spots on the face of this earth. It is a beautiful area today because of actions of people who understand the concept of stewardship, and who have been willing to act to protect this precious resource.

Good Harbor Beach and Marshes: Mayor John Bell is trying to protect the Good Harbor Beach area. With regards to the threat posed by the Brier Neck Crossing condominium proposal, he has stated that nothing should be built in this area because anything that is built will degrade the beauty of this treasured resource.

Thank you Mayor Bell for working to protect the Good Harbor marshes.

Salt Island: A former BNA member has taken on the stewardship function for Salt Island by purchasing the island a number of years ago. The island was owned for decades by a lobsterman who lived on, and ran his business from, the island for the six good weather months of the year. When he died, there was much talk about what would be done with Salt Island. In about 1950 a developer attempted to build a small industrial marina on Salt Island, just west of where the sand bar meets the island. Fortunately Mother Nature stepped in to protect Salt Island. Several summer storms destroyed much of what was under construction, and the developer abandoned the site. The construction debris was not removed from the island until the fall.

Concerns about a variety of commercial activities on the island were resolved by a former BNA resident purchasing the island. His continued stewardship of Salt Island is even more commendable because he no longer owns a house on Brier Neck. To him, I say thank you very much for protecting the island.

Brier Neck: A significant threat of commercial development on Brier Neck arose when the estate of the Spates family decided to sell their convenience store and residence at the corner of Witham Street and Thatcher Road. At the same time, they were selling the two adjacent lots going up the hill. The BNA as an institution, and one individual member of the BNA, teamed up to prevent commercial development there by purchasing all three lots.

There was (and in my opinion still is) a credible threat that all three lots could return to commercial use. The convenience store was there for decades, and was built before the BNA was created. I think there were restrictive covenants put in the deeds when the lots were purchased from the Spates estate indicating that if the owner of the corner lot (BNA lot) petitions the city to revert back to commercial use of the lot, then the owner of the two adjacent lots may also apply for commercial use. BNA ownership of the formerly commercial lot precludes this from happening.

Thank you, current and former members of the BNA, for recognizing that the only way to really control what happens with a piece of property is to own that property.

In summary, I believe that the portion of the BNA dues that covers ownership costs of the BNA corner lot on Witham Street is a bargain, and a good investment in Brier Neck's future. I think that the BNA should continue to own that lot to protect the unique character of Brier Neck.

       Sincerely,

       Lyman P. Morrill

Draft Minutes of Witham Street Lot Committee Meeting: January 31, 2005

The committee meeting was held at 8 PM at Terry Segal's house, 8 Salt Island Road. Present were Terry Segal, chairman, Chuck Everett, Sheryl Ellis, Donna Kramich, and Lyman Morrill. Committee member Arthur Socolow was in Florida.

Terry Segal opened the meeting by reviewing the title search which Michael Riordan, a title examiner, had done of the three lots, the association's lot on Thatcher Road and the two lots next to that lot owned by Jayne Fifield Knott and Douglas Fifield as joint tenants. Previously, Mr. Segal sent all committee members a copy of Mr. Riordan's title report.

All three lots are zoned residential; the lots are registered land, and are buildable lots with no restrictions. The 2005 assessed value of the Brier Neck Association lot is $255,4000; the assessed value of the other two lots is $275,900 and $261,700. It is Terry's opinion that a sale of the Brier Neck lot would produce in excess of $400,000.

Donna Kramich reported that the Essex Greenbelt Association was not interested in acquiring the Association's lot, and she would also determine if the city had any interest in acquiring the lot and maintaining it as a park.

Between insurance and taxes, it costs $2500-$3000 per year to maintain the lot. Sheryl Ellis, who lives opposite the lot, has voluntarily and for no compensation, been mowing the grass on the lot for the past few years.

Sheryl and Donna discussed various ways to raise money to defray the annual cost of the lot, i.e. renting out the lot for yard sales, etc.

Sheryl Ellis also said she planned to meet with the city to see if taxes on the lot, around $2400 per year, could be reduced if the city was granted a conservation easement.

Lyman Morrill reported he spoke to Dick Fifield who indicated he did not plan to see or build on his two lots.

There was a substantial division of opinion on whether the lot should be sold. Terry Segal favors a sale, and using the proceeds to reduce Association dues, possibly make a contribution of a portion of the sale proceeds to a worthy local non-profit, i.e. the library, hospital, etc. Terry also indicated that he feels if the issue of a sale is put to a vote of the Brier Neck Association, more than a simple majority should have to approve such a sale. Terry also feels if the lot is not sold, we should spend some of the Association's money to create an appropriate sign indicating the property is the gateway to Brier Neck and that the Association should hire someone to cut the grass rather than rely on the pro bono services of Sheryl Ellis.

Chuck Everett leans toward a sale, because he feels there will be eventually litigation challenging the right of the Association to maintain a private beach, and the sale proceeds could be used to defend such a suit.

Lyman Morrill is against a sale under any circumstances as are Sheryl Ellis and Donna Kramich. Sheryl lives opposite the lot, and feels that construction of a single family house on the lot will not only disturb her quiet enjoyment but significantly impair her view. Donna Kramich lives next to Cheryl and feels that a house on the property will detract from the neighborhood. Lyman Morrill does not live near the lot, but feels that a sale is not in the best interests of the Association.

The committee agreed to review the draft minutes and meet in the future.

Respectfully Submitted,
Terry Philip Segal
Chairman