owners as in property owners not the business owners. The owners of the actual land
- Thread starter Ken
- Start date
Sosua Beach Unions Want More Involvement
- Status
In return, they get the best part of the beach cleared, so that their land is that much more valuable for development. IIRC there are plans to build 3 condo buildings of 7 stories each on the land between the beach and the highway. Removing all of the shacks will open up the views of the lower floors.
I think NCD is right. They avoid the hassle of eviction and clearing the land, plus they get approval for a seven story building.
That is how I see it. It is unlikely the vendors will be able to fight city hall and win. Still no dates for the project to start?
Certainly donating the land for the plazas at each end of the beach to the government for a few vendors that will remain is the trade off to having the land in the center of the beach cleared off with government support which will make their construction projects on their remaining land more valuable.
There is a single owner of all the land above the beach and he is the one that donated the land to the government. The "businesses" do NOT own any of the land
Did they say what they would accept?
I lived in Charamicos back in 2013 and I'm still in contact with friends who live
up there. They have been telling me since last year that people know the clock
is ticking. Many of them seem to think they (the business owners/ locals) can
somehow stop it but unfortunately I do not believe it possible. The President showed
up in person to accept those land deeds from the property owner(s) for a reason.
Anyone with half a brain got the message.
I wonder how many "Layers" of "owners" of shacks exists?
First of all, I completely understand there is just one legal owner.
There are also shack "owners" who have been there for decades and consider themselves to be "owners."
They in turn rent to others, and I'm sure many of those others rent to still another layer of business folks.
I'd bet there are shack renters who believe they are renting from owners, when in fact they are just the lowest rung of the ladder.
First of all, I completely understand there is just one legal owner.
There are also shack "owners" who have been there for decades and consider themselves to be "owners."
They in turn rent to others, and I'm sure many of those others rent to still another layer of business folks.
I'd bet there are shack renters who believe they are renting from owners, when in fact they are just the lowest rung of the ladder.
Exactamente.
I am not in favor of any business owner on the beach being shut down however many people arguing in their favor claiming "every year they say they are going to close/ remodel the beach" are ommitting this very important pont.
Well, if they start tomorrow I might survive to see the completed project. 3 condo buildings 7 stories tall, I wonder where all that sewage is going.
If your Family owned Beachfront Property, and for the last few decades you had squatters on it ..so you were in a Holding pattern.
Along comes a Rich Hotel Corporation, and they offer you MILLIONS and they would solve your Squatter problems , because they are Politically Connected ..
I wonder how you would feel about affecting the Locals in that Scenario..
We can " FEEL " however we want about the Locals and Access to the Beach , and the destruction of the VIEW
and IMO we DO have a RIGHT to access to the beach ( sand part) . That should not change .
but as far as the Landowners getting PAID for what belonged to them
.. in the Bigger Picture isn't Legal Property Ownership & the Ability to SELL what belongs to you more important ?
I know local people who have operated on the beach for many, many years, am I not allowed to feel bad for them? We all know, regular Dominican's will not be allowed to frequent the beach, am I not allowed to feel bad them?
I personally will miss the days I spent at the various bars/restaurants. What am I going to do now...go sit on a towel on the beach for the day...no drinks or food? I doubt it very much. It will be like Playa Alicia...a horrible beach to hang around on.
Sure, the owners have every right. I would sell if I owned that beach also. I read here the land was "donated" to the government, I suppose there are many benefits to that. That said, I still say that gentrification is not good for poorer locals and I am sad for the loss of the beach.
Why would I or anyone take away your right to feel bad for them ?..
I never said you should not feel bad for them ...
but in the end, There is nothing we can do for them , this is a Legal Matter now , especially since the President of the Country is involved ..
these deals are going through . there is no stopping it .
I highly doubt the land was just donated for Zero .. probably some huge Tax Benefits were reaped , at the very least . OR the land owners are getting a slice of the ACTION.. . STOCKS perhaps in the New Corporation which owns the Hotels
Claiming it was Donated , makes it harder to hate them , or worse , possible retaliation and violence..
I never said you should not feel bad for them ...
but in the end, There is nothing we can do for them , this is a Legal Matter now , especially since the President of the Country is involved ..
these deals are going through . there is no stopping it .
I highly doubt the land was just donated for Zero .. probably some huge Tax Benefits were reaped , at the very least . OR the land owners are getting a slice of the ACTION.. . STOCKS perhaps in the New Corporation which owns the Hotels
Claiming it was Donated , makes it harder to hate them , or worse , possible retaliation and violence..
I agree. If it not for my family connections to the area...I would be out. What fun is a beach town with no beach?
Ah yes, the Emerald city commeth, 3 buildings 7 stories high, what was the name of that AI in Cabarete that was supposed to ignite the town? Ocean lifestyle, two blocks away from the defunct casino. It's gonna be a huge metropolis I say, from Sosua to Cab
- Status