jason Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 This is some sad news for CRCK:http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/05/04/charles-river-canoe-and-kayak-loses-permit-run-newton-boathouse-longtime-operator-loses-boathouse-bid/rO0kfthlSkIdur8UhIAH2M/story.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnHuth Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Ugh....that place was the center of their operations. I know a lot of people who work there. I launch many times just across the river from that spot. This is going to be tough - they have a huge inventory of kayaks, canoes, etc. Recently they're branched out into paddle boards. Whether or not this is in the 'best interest' of the taxpayer remains to be seen. Very sad news, indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gcosloy Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 This is terrible news for them. I'm sad to hear this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Sylvester Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Just another reason not to be beholden to the state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Allen Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Just another reason not to be beholden to the state.care to suggest another way to get access to waterfront property? I imagine any cost effective ideas would be appreciated.bestPhil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prudenceb Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 This really stinks!pru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick stoehrer Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Sorry fella has to move the business he built over 40 years but couldn't you argue too that we've been subsidizing his business for 40 years? $5,000 is less than $420/month and $30,000 in capital improvements over 40 years is about $63/month....for what is ostensibly a great location.Another way of looking at it is that we've been subsidizing his business and that location for 40 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob budd Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Wow, an interesting range of points of view. I am ambivalent. For me, the first thing is that the state certainly has the right to "sell to the highest bidder". From there I see several people I almost consider friends (don't hang out, etc.but all dealings have been positive) now potentially unemployed, thus the unhappy face. The plan for accessible docks sounds good while on the other hand I'm not certain how safe such a thing would/could be or what it would mean to the non-accessible paddler. Anyone can still use the pkg lot across the river, I assume, so not sure the public loses anything unless we find the new owner is an evildoer of sorts. To that anyone who respects the location and (especially) the down/upstream environs is welcome. I wonder how/if this will effect the ROTC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted May 6, 2013 Author Share Posted May 6, 2013 Sorry fella has to move the business he built over 40 years but couldn't you argue too that we've been subsidizing his business for 40 years? $5,000 is less than $420/month and $30,000 in capital improvements over 40 years is about $63/month....for what is ostensibly a great location.Another way of looking at it is that we've been subsidizing his business and that location for 40 years.I am sure that they have spent a lot more than $30K over the years. My understanding is they just recently spent the $30K. I can't say that a 5K/year lease anything other than a deal and a half. Even if they were getting a deal on the lease they really provided a great resource to the community.CRCK started a lot of people in this club out and pointed them in the direction of sea kayak. I know that I did a number of trips with them and purchased my first sea kayak from them.http://boatinginboston.com look to be much more of a rec boating type of group, time will tell if they are able to keep things at the same level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Allen Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 My point wasnt that CRCK was paying too little, just that we watersports enthusiasts pretty much have to rely on "the state" for access to river or ocean, as otherwise it's all private property. I dont know the details of the bidding process or what the company or state have been doing in the past. I can speculate that losing the boat house will reduce their ability to carry as large a diversity of sea boats as they do for both rental and sale and that will be a loss to us all. and just for disclosure, while I teach part time for CRCK, I know no more than what I read in the globe article about the whole shebang. best Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kate Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 It seems a pity that they received such short notice given their long occupancy of that space. Hard for a location-specific business to pick up and move in a few months during peak season. That seems just wrong to me. I'm sorry to hear it and I hope they come through it well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.