Wow, Reynolds Mountain view

[OconeeMountains]

The folks speaking out against mountaintop development in Asheville (and any part of the Blue Ridge/Southern Appalachian Mountain Range) are right. These mountains have been standing beautifully, majestically for thousands of years as refuges for plant and animal life and testament to the strength and creativity of God. Many say that such 'development' is necessary for a healthy economy, but fail to acknowledge the fact the national and local economies have grown faster in the last 50 years of human existance than ever before in the history of man. A look at Asheville photos (and surrounding mountains) from the 1950s reveal that if the current pace of development continues, all the remaining mountain viewsheds and natural habitat will be lost - Can we actually attempt to justify such a beautiful, permenant loss becase we need more jobs? because we need more money? How do you think the creator would view this...?

On a less philosophical and more practical note - Anyone moving to the area should look into 'green builders' who are developing clustered, well-designed and walkable communities off the mountaintop and near town. These green development allow the easiest of access to the city and if you want a mountain view, it is only a hike away.

Also, it is worth mentioning the value of Conservation Easements. These tools allow a landowner (E.g., one who owns some of the land in the area) to place an easement on their land which forbids 'development' of their land (such as a subdivision) but allows them to continue to live on their land, have their kids live on the land or farm their land (among others) without any disturbance whatsoever. In return for accepting a conservation easement on their land, these landowners are rewarded with both Federal and State tax incentives which make the option financially sound. These legal tools are a practical measure which have already proven effective in protecting great swaths of natural habitat and pristine mountain land from Valle Crucis in the High Country to the Green River Gorge in Extreme Southern Henderson County. Please look into them further if interested by exploring the non-profit Land Trust Alliance at WWW.LTA.ORG.

Our grandchildren and their grandchildren deserve these mountains. As do the grandchildren of the Native Black Bear and Brook Trout. Let us not forsake these values for the sake of un-planned economics.

[Appalachian State]

Originally Posted by OconeeMountains

The folks speaking out against mountaintop development in Asheville (and any part of the Blue Ridge/Southern Appalachian Mountain Range) are right. These mountains have been standing beautifully, majestically for thousands of years as refuges for plant and animal life and testament to the strength and creativity of God. Many say that such 'development' is necessary for a healthy economy, but fail to acknowledge the fact the national and local economies have grown faster in the last 50 years of human existance than ever before in the history of man. A look at Asheville photos (and surrounding mountains) from the 1950s reveal that if the current pace of development continues, all the remaining mountain viewsheds and natural habitat will be lost - Can we actually attempt to justify such a beautiful, permenant loss becase we need more jobs? because we need more money? How do you think the creator would view this...?

I like mountains. I like food and shelter more. I can justify providing a place to live, a job to make money at and still stay right with The Creator.

Originally Posted by OconeeMountains

- Anyone moving to the area should look into 'green builders' who are developing clustered, well-designed and walkable communities off the mountaintop and near town. These green development allow the easiest of access to the city and if you want a mountain view, it is only a hike away.

No everyone wants to live in a place like that.

Originally Posted by OconeeMountains

Also, it is worth mentioning the value of Conservation Easements.

Yeah, great idea if you never plan to try and sell your property. We had a client who has been trying to sell their property for over 3 years now. Why the difficulty? In large part because of the convservation easement. I caution anyone considering this to look at that option very carefully.

[slaz]

Of the people on this thread how many on the pro development side are Real Estate Brokers? I used to be one. Maybe that's why I'm against development at the rate its going. Some is good and needed but we need the right kind of development. What's right? Don't know. But as a judge once said "I know pornography when I see it". I know over development when I see it.

[OconeeMountains]

In response to my suggestion that economics and job creation (through 'developing' the mountains) is not a good justification for destroying the blue ridge mountain views and vital habitat, you said:

I like mountains. I like food and shelter more. I can justify providing a place to live, a job to make money at and still stay right with The Creator.

That's a fine attitude and I don't mean to imply the creator would take issue with any of us seeking a job and welfare for our families etc. I am not so convinced, however, that our creator's vision of seeking our 'welfare' includes a mansion on a mountain. Quite frankly, food and shelter can be achieved in a more simple manner that is more sustainable, kinder to the natural world, and better for the community.

In response to my suggestion that folks seek out sustainable housing, you said:

Not everyone wants to live in a place like that.

You are right. In the past and perhaps currently in our country, most folks would prefer acreage in the country and a cheap 3500 sq.ft. home versus a well built, energy efficient home with amenities downtown. However, the former idea that we can all buy huge homes on large tracts of land is quickly becoming outdated as a non-sustainable option when one takes into account our burgeoning population (in the US and abroad) and the correlating high cost of construction and resources. Secondly, this old school 'vision' of what an ideallic home is may fade even quicker as gas prices continue to financially overburden those who must commute 30 miles or more everyday. Personally, I believe the quicker we move away from these outdated views of the 'ideal' home, the better our society will become through more investment in our cities, less pollution, and more greenspace/habitat. Besides, have you seen how beautiful and liveable new sustainable homes can be?

Lastly, on conservation easements, you said:

Yeah, great idea if you never plan to try and sell your property. We had a client who has been trying to sell their property for over 3 years now. Why the difficulty? In large part because of the convservation easement. I caution anyone considering this to look at that option very carefully.

You said you have a client who is trying to sell their land - So, you are likely a real estate broker or developer, which (and no offense here) reveals why your perspective on non-sustainable development is a bit stuck in one corner.

Conservation easements are not good for folks trying to get rich on the sale of their land; instead, they provide a great financial reward (for maintaining greenspace and habitat) through sizable tax deductions after landowners agree to the easement on their land. Sure, you won't get as much money or enjoy a quick high dollar sale when you move away, but you're missing the point - Conservation easements allow land owners to conserve their property, get a great financial incentive immediately, and be able to do all the things (generally except develop/subdivide) with their land they would otherwise do - including having their family inherit that land, farm the land, sell the land etc. Conservation Easements represent a great and effective tool for land conservation in the modern age. Lastly, 'conservation buyers' exist around the country, including personal friends of mine in NC and SC, who buy conservation easement properties to live in themselves when up for sale. Maybe its not for everyone, but many think living in neat home on conserved/protected land and habitat would be fantastic.

[Suede Wuede]

An individual's choice is what determines the path a society chooses to follow. Wal-Mart wasn't built to shut down the Mom's and Pop's stores. We choose to shop there for the prices. Asheville and the surrounding communities were not built for the rest of the U.S. to move to, but as we see every day, northerners, Floridians, half-backers, and west coast residents migrate to the area. So, just like Wal-Mart expanding across the country because of OUR demand, Asheville and the towns around it must grow to accommodate the transients.

As a person who helps in the development of multifamily properties, I hate to see a tree cut down. However, I would rather see 20 acres of trees destroyed for 200 apartment homes rather than 20 acres of trees destroyed for 20 homes. From what I've seen on Reynolds Mountain website, it looks as if the development will be pleasant to look at and offer convenience for its residents (and surrounding neighborhoods) to shop locally, exercise locally, and eat locally rather than consuming the fuel to drive into surrounding towns.

When we choose to stop shopping at the big-box stores, they will stop growing. When we choose to stop moving to highly desired cities, they will stop growing. A city will never turn down a development when it knows the project can be easily supported and when the city knows it will receive large sums of taxes. Reynolds Mountain's mixed use development is smart development. We may not all like it, but as the outsiders continue to move to this state and especially this region, we must allow for these properties to happen.

[histo320]

Even though I agree with new houses ruining the landscape, it is better to have people with money move into the area as opposed to more hippys and panhandlers that do nothing but soak up taxpayers money for their unemployment benefits or the drug addicted non-working class.

[Kootr]

Originally Posted by histo320

Even though I agree with new houses ruining the landscape, it is better to have people with money move into the area as opposed to more hippys and panhandlers that do nothing but soak up taxpayers money for their unemployment benefits or the drug addicted non-working class.

You get right to the point without beating around the bushes!

[Woodfin Stinks]

My biggest objection to these private communities that are being built where everyone is forced to view them is that they are being subsidized with taxpayers money. For example, because of Reynolds Mountain, the town of Woodfin is attempting to forcibly annex around 3500 people from Buncombe County so that their taxes can develop the base of Reynolds Mountain, instead of being used on worthwhile services closer to where these citizens live (Leicester not Merrimon). Why should our tax dollars develop a downtown stripmall area for a private development? It's bad enough that you subject us to look at poorly built McMansions...don't expect me to play nice when my money is being extorted.

[Catrick]

This doesn't have to do with Reynolds Mountain but it seems to fit with the flow of "ruining" some areas.

About 6 years ago, my sister was living in Tampa. Every Sunday in the paper there was a full page ad for building cabins or houses in Murphy. I can't recall the price but she was able to afford two homes. Tampa and Murphy.

She and a friend of hers, they are both widows, took a drive up to Murphy. My sister purchased land on the side of the mountain for a cabin and her friend had something built in town. Not recently because of the economy but even last year she was bitterly complaining about all the building on her mountain and how they were, in her words. "raping the whole mountain". Ironic because she did the same thing.

My point is that the developers were advertising in certain markets in Florida actively seeking buyers. And of course the city and county were on board so they could increase the tax revenues. Naturally the citizens of Murphy, at least the ones my sister came to know were not happy that all the building was going on.

It's a tough call. I have no issue with someone falling in love with the mountains and buying land and building on it. In fact I wish I could. It's all the huge developments that just ruin certain areas visually.

I saw what over building did in especially south Florida. What beach? You can't see it through all the condos built on the water. Then they all complain about storms and erosion and paying more for insurance. And it's happening elsewhere in Florida. The Everglades? No, we have to build as close to it as we can so we can build ultra-exclusive homes for all the athletes and rich people. It's called Weston. When you are driving east across the Everglades there is this glaring glow that eminates from one small area-the above named Weston.

Sorry but I am getting old and cranky and hate seeing the beautiful areas we have built up with no regard for Mother Nature.

Just my four cents worth.