The Tribune

BALMORAL is a quiet neighbourhood on Sanford Drive in Nassau. Situated a block south of the Cecil Wallace-Whitfield Centre that houses the Office of the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Finance, and just east of Liberty Overlook, the residence of the American Ambassador when there is one, Balmoral is a highly desirable residential community.

Most who live there are young professionals and families.

They walk their children and their dogs. They ride bikes or jog.

They work out in a large grassy area and on holidays, arrange the common area barbeque.

They wave to neighbours, hail newcomers, bring gifts for newborns, and pretty much mind their own business, going to work by day and to sleep at night knowing the gate is secure and guards roam the seven acres of residential property in golf carts.

Because of its desirability with lush landscaping, well-designed contemporary living and tight security, Balmoral is also one of the most popular long-term rental properties for executive housing for embassies or consulates. It is residential through and through with only one three-storey office complex, built initially to house the developer and a few others for rental revenue. Traffic to the complex immediately inside the gate and out of the way of homes is minimal. The style of the office complex looks like any of the structures, complementing the community.

Enraged

All that background is to underscore what kind of near cataclysmic event it would take for this semi-serene, somewhat somnambulistic community to rise up in arms, enraged, united to fight what it cannot believe has been proposed – an eight-story, 50-room hotel with a rooftop terrace and public restrooms in the heart of their gated, family-oriented residential community.

Build your hotel somewhere else, say residents of Balmoral. This is our home, not a commercial strip. This is our neighbourhood where our children can play safely outside, where we can stop and talk with neighbours even after the sun sets. Build your hotel on Paradise Island or Cable Beach, not on a street without a traffic light or a store, a street of homes not of fuel stations, restaurants and souvenir shops. How could Town Planning even consider allowing a use so incompatible with a family neighbourhood, they ask?

The alarm bell jingled and sirens rang out when the full-page notice of a Town Planning meeting appeared in this paper on Thursday, October 12. The owner of the Balmoral Club, which had been sold to a private enterprise by developer of Balmoral some time before, wanted to alter part of the original building on the Register of Historic Properties to build a 50-key hotel, eight stories high, add public restrooms with hotel and penthouse units and a rooftop terrace.

The proposal was for a full-blown resort development overlooking the Office of the Prime Minister and it met with full-blown community shock and outrage from the neighbours who would be impacted by the change.

Two days after the notice appeared, more than 25 homeowners joined a virtual meeting with a resident attorney acting as a courtesy moderator. The following day, a petition was drawn up, circulated by Tuesday of this week and within hours, filled with signatures. The Homeowner Rights vs Balmoral Club owner battle was on.

Blindsided

Homeowners said they were blindsided by the fact that somehow the club had gained preliminary approval of a site plan in February, claiming they were never notified of the application. For that reason alone, they said, any action should be postponed.

And there were other substantive reasons to reject the application, they argued.

Everything from height to security issues, from noise to peace of mind, from strain on already strained resources was wrong with the proposed project, they said, a project that would surely shatter the peace and security of a residential community and had no business being built there.

They pointed to height, 119 feet, towering above everything around it, dominating the grounds, obstructing the views of some who would live behind it.

They said it would invite massive traffic. Construction of a major facility such as a hotel or high-rise condominium necessitates heavy equipment, trucking, crew vehicles, all taking their toll on the roads and causing further congestion on a property that is already bulging at the seams. Additional traffic, and traffic with no ties to the community would pose hazards to children at play and others, including pedestrians.

They cited a strain on infrastructure that is already at a breaking point with hundreds of people living on a property that was once the estate of a single family, they said, noting that Water & Sewerage Corporation, which has reportedly responded to numerous reports, is at a loss as to how to build capacity for those who today call Balmoral home.

Uninhabitable

The proposed hotel and public restrooms would cause more sanitation issues and could possibly make Balmoral uninhabitable for an unknowable length of time, they said.

What makes the Balmoral Club request for an 8-storey hotel in the heart of a residential neighbourhood so interesting is not just the gall of the request which seems to the outsider so out of line and incompatible with its surroundings, but the fact that that it is part of what appears to be a growing movement in which the public is making its voice heard. It is a slow but sure sign of increased civic participation, thanks in part to both ORG and the existence of the Department of Environmental Planning & Protection.

First, we had the community of Love Beach fighting a successful developer not because what he has built before was not worth boasting about but what he was about to build was in the wrong place, they said, and would forever alter their lifestyle and community. Then we had the voices of those opposed to a proposal by Atlantis to use Montagu Bay as a landing strip for its seaplane excursions. The voices spoke out and won. This week, a private family named Hoffer who have lived next door to where Goldwynn rose on Cable Beach won the first round of its case arguing that the developer’s land acquisition was changing its life.

Now, we have the situation with Balmoral residents vs. Balmoral Club. But this one has an additional element that makes it even more interesting. The height restrictions, use and character compatibility are all critical, especially given the fact that owners bought in a residential community, not a resort destination and it could make for a line of lawsuits an arm and a leg long but because of one other element.

Add historic preservation to this and there is more reason than ever to refuse the application.

Treasures

As more of Nassau’s historic architecture vanishes, leaving fewer traces of the city’s magic, it is more important than ever to pay homage to the treasures that remain. The Balmoral Club is one of those. Never will there be another two-story sculptured brass staircase railing built like the one at Balmoral. Never will there be hand-painted tiles like those that make up part of the décor of Balmoral. Even the images that hang on its walls, like those of a young Sean Connery by famed photographer Roland Rose – both actor and photographer now deceased – or the royalty photos tell a story of a time that deserves respect. Never will there be the famed nightly black tie dinners for which Balmoral estate was known, but there will be families whose children learn to swim in its pool and play on its grounds and whose parents will be proud to say they live in a fine family community.

Changing the building that served as the heart of the development, using remaining open green space for a parking lot instead of a park under discussion, building 119 feet into the sky - every aspect of the proposed project alters the character and security of the community. Every aspect of the proposal is a hard and fast slap in the face of owners who put their trust in the developer who sold them a means to a lifestyle in a safe community, not a property in which the hotel, lights, music and the comings and goings, checking in and checking out of strangers and a transient population would be the de facto star.

The private ownership of that clubhouse, which buyers were told was a club they could join for a fee to use the pool and fitness facilities, should not be favored over the promises made to owners.

Not since the battle for Clifton have we had such an outpouring by the outraged – a public citizenry that finds its courage, is standing up for its rights, a public that suddenly is not afraid to speak out, a quiet public that finds its voice, undaunted by well-funded opposition, and staunch in its belief that right will win out. May the voices of the people continue to be heard and the courage to speak out be applauded.