For those of you who don't read the Sentinel but do read our blog, here's another Opinion letter that was published in the paper in regards to the destruction of 71 main Street.
Let me get this straight:
In Winchester, there’s an old house in the historic district that’s owned by a woman who works for the town and is on a number of boards, who wants to tear this house down and put up a Dollar General.
The property is on Main Street and sits between the community center and the VFW. The house is one of the first buildings in Winchester (from the 1700s) and she wants to put in its place a monstrosity of a building that looks like any other strip mall store in the country.
When she bought the property, she knew it was in the historic district, but now she wants the historic district board to ignore the fact that her building would disrupt the historical cohesion among the district’s buildings.
There is also a brand new Family Dollar store in town that was built outside of the district in an existing shopping center.
She sent her lawyer to a historic district meeting who asked that a certain historic district board member not be allowed to deliberate on her application because of possible “animosity” that could spill over from the planning board, where both women serve and where the woman who has the building has started the process to have the other removed from the planning board.
This is the same lawyer who represented the applicant of the asphalt plant that came before the planning board last year. The woman who voted for the asphalt plant is the one who wants to put up the Dollar General. The woman who voted against the asphalt plant is the one they’re trying to remove from the planning board.
From where I sit, the “animosity” is coming from the woman who wants to put up the Dollar General, not the historic district board member. And I think it’s directed to every Winchester resident who wants to protect our town from becoming just another ugly backwater town.