Town area is back in the news. First there was the highly controversial scheme to build at Catchment Hill, then a second plan for Ship's Hill, which is much closer to Marriott's Castle Harbour Resort. The two ideas are separate but the Ship's Hill Tucker's Point plan came about after the controversy over Catchment Hill.

It seems to us that someone at Bermuda Properties might have decided to use the old compromise idea of development, if you ask for two you may well get one, or ask for a much bigger development than you require, and then be a "good guy'' and design down to what you really want. It's an old trick of which the public should be aware.

Be careful. Bermuda Properties is not now saying that the Catchment Hill scheme has been given up, it is only saying that Catchment Hill is on hold.

Bermuda Properties General Manager Peter Parker is quoted as saying: "Any future development will be years away and would be limited to the 14 acres of concrete catchment and abandoned quarries, thus retaining the open spaces.'' For some time now there have been reports that Government was going to compromise with Bermuda Properties and allow development of the old rainwater catchment area.

The second scheme to spend $65 million to develop Ship's Hill and to build lavish houses on Tucker's Point and sell them abroad is much more complex.

Suspicions about the scheme were instantly raised when it was given approval under a special order by then Environment Minister Gerald Simons. It may be that the Cabinet felt it was moving tourism forward or it may be that Bermuda Properties has clout.

There have been repeated suggestions that the scheme, out of which Bermuda Properties will attempt to make millions, is somehow linked to the success of the Castle Harbour and the future of tourism. Yet when you examine the plan and ask a few questions there does not seem to be any real connection with either.

It is true that Marriott's Castle Harbour has been a troubled operation and Bermuda needs to do everything it can to boost tourism and help the hotels. We could not agree more with that. However it is impossible to see just how a lavish housing development would benefit the hotel. The people buying such houses are unlikely to use the hotel very much and much more likely to gravitate to the Mid Ocean Club and its golf course.

As we see it, Bermuda Properties, a mainly non-Bermudian owned company with not much apparent interest in the future of Bermuda, has large property holdings, granted about 60 years ago, for the good reason of promoting tourism in Bermuda. Bermuda Properties leased the hotel to the Marriott chain and retained the rest of the land and the golf course. Now it seems that Bermuda Properties would like to make a killing in land development at the expense of Bermudians and the future of Bermuda.

Bermudians should consider whether claims that the development will assist tourism are not just a smoke screen for a scheme to make millions. Many Bermudians are happy to do what they can to assist our tourist economy, and that is right and proper, but we should also be careful not to be abused.