Re: what is wrong with this picture

Roger Hogan Wrote:


> My answers are from memory
>
> I don't think the commission gave the Village the
> land but they agreed to a joint use of it with the
> village. The Friends in fact did the picnic tables
> so they also helped. The railroad received
> something like 9 truckloads of extra pavement, A
> rebuilt entrance exit on the North side and
> rebuilt road to the South entrance and a new ramp
> or steps from Terrace ave. If my memory is correct
> the railroad still owns the property. The size of
> the property really does not allow you much area
> to work with and the new center wouldn't fit
> there. I looked at the property when I bought the
> hotel and just not enough available footage with
> the set backs and parking requirements to build a
> place large enough to get a return on your
> investment IMHO.<

OK thank you for the clarification. I don’t know if I can agree with the clock park lot not being large enough for a commercial purpose. It didn’t help that the state cut down the lot by taking parking and sidewalk though… who is to say HotRod’s “Home of the Big (Hot) Dog” wasn’t eyeing this property for lease at some point in the future…what would that have added to the RR coffers…$10K?, $20 K? per year? you do the math and I submit whatever they got in concrete work is but a drop in the bucket to its market potential. What also doesn’t make sense to me is if this is still RR property and it was designated a Primary View #2 then why do you plant evergreen trees that will block the view from this location. Further, if you really want it to be a view point then why didn’t they build an elevated platform and make it actually useful for its intended purpose?

>
> I think the request for the holding pond area was
> from the State Of New Mexico not from the Village.
> What was the railroad to do turn down the state
> request when they were relying on the state to
> keep them running.<

Well maybe there is a cause and effect here. I am not a civil engineer but it seems to me when you pave over Terrace Avenue, adding sidewalks & gutters then you have radically changed the runoff pattern. In my opinion Chama has actually destroyed part of the character of the town with the continued redevelopment. There doesn’t appear to be much concern at the county level on matters of historical or architectural sensibility and so I see Chama headed down the same yuppie path as places like Telluride. It is your town and if that is what makes you all happy then go for it, just remember your choices all have consequences, one of which will be a loss of tourists like myself who are not looking for another suburban looking town filled with gift shops hawking cheap Chinese knock-offs of various goods.



> My understanding is the town has used this
> property and maintained it since before the
> railroad was purchased and in fact everybody
> including the railroad thought the town owned it.
> The village is willing to buy it, lease it and or
> trade for it. My impression from the commissioners
> is they figured a lease was best.<

Can you please show on a map or photo exactly what property you are referring to?


P.S. Thank you for posting the photos of various sites around Chama. I am going to be posting some other photos and thoughts later and perhaps these can be used to pin point the locations in question.

Rod