|
Development’s Cost
To the Editor:
I have a few comments to add to David Snell’s recent letter re: the coming of Lowe’s Inc. and the granting of “incentives” to offset Lowe’s “extraordinary site costs.”
In a recent visit to Winston-Salem I noted an article in the Winston-Salem Journal on the impacts of Dell Computer’s 500,00 square-foot assembly plant on the surrounding neighborhoods. Dell was “recruited” to the area through a generous offering of incentives and tax relief by Forsyth County and the state of North Carolina, which totaled $279.2 million. Road improvements related to Dell are expected to cost $7 million, paid for by the state. The $115 million plant is expected to create 1,700 jobs over the next five years and bring in thousands more from future suppliers.
The article described the growing frustration of local citizens to determine (from Department of Transportation officials) the exact impacts of the plant on their lives, including the loss of property to projects in progress or planned for the future. These include as many as 75 trucks an hour entering and leaving the plant and various road “improvements” for widening and repaving nearby roads, signal improvements to help increased traffic flow, and the building of an entrance road, Dell boulevard.
Sylva is blissfully not Winston-Salem, but the impacts of Lowe’s on local traffic patterns at the intersection of N.C. 107 and N.C. 116 will be significant.
Rumors of more development along 107 nearer to Cullowhee and the expanded Western Carolina University Millenninal campus. The floodgates of sprawl development have opened considerably in the past few months.
This kind of unregulated and unplanned growth will lead to further justification for a bypass road around Sylva, the kind of four-lane corridor envisioned by DOT in its 2003 feasibility study for solving traffic congestion on 107. This project remains on the DOT Transportation Improvement Plan.
One can argue that such growth in inevitable, but unplanned growth should not be inevitable. In November 2003, Jackson County created a Transportation Task Force, largely in response to resolutions from the towns of Sylva, Dillsboro and Webster in opposition to the construction of a Southern Loop bypass.
The task force has met two times in the past 16 months. At its last meeting, members indicated a priority for fixing the 107 corridor. There remains some confusion as to how the task force can proceed without any land use plan or process for planning that has been offered by the county. DOT has indicated its partnership with the task force depends on such long-range planning.
I would suggest the town of Sylva or Jackson County ask Lowe’s or any future “big-box” developers to assist in funding an N.C. 107 corridor study for ways to improve traffic flow. This may include the construction of new roads parallel to 107, similar to what (Sylva zoning administrator) Jim Aust presented to Sylva’s planning board in 2003.
Eckerd and Lowe’s have only indicated a willingness to fund road improvements adjacent to their parking lots. It is time we ask that such developers mitigate for their impact on our “quality of life” beyond their parking lots. In some areas this is referred to as “impact fees,” a sort of reverse “pay and you play” whereby developers are held accountable.
As David Snell has indicated, it is time to “sweeten the pot” for taxpayers. At the current rate of development along 107, we will soon be held hostage to the resurrected Southern Loop bypass road.
Roger Turner
Sylva
Saddened by WCU’s growth
To the Editor:
Every time I read or hear about Chancellor (John) Bardo’s Millennial Campus or his plan to double Western Carolina University’s size, I feel sad. WCU should stay as it is – a great college with a small-town atmosphere.
Doubling WCU’s population will mean more traffic, more congestion, more waiting in lines, more pollution, more generic franchises, more crime – and fewer woods, fewer areas to hike, fewer familiar faces and less natural, beautiful, unsoiled land. Crowded, sprawling towns built around campuses like the one he envisions are everywhere, but towns like ours are rare, and they are rapidly disappearing.
Students who crave big-city excitement have plenty of choices. But WCU fills a special niche for students who love this small, quaint, rural college. My daughter could have gone anywhere, but after a year at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, she returned home, realizing that only WCU offered her everything – personal attention, a beautiful setting and a great education. I own a restaurant that caters to students, many of whom fled big cities in Georgia and Florida to live in this small mountainous town. They all agree: the town’s size and unspoiled beauty are the things that drew them here.
I realize Bardo is responding to orders from Chapel Hill to make Western grow. But what business does Chapel Hill have changing our way of life? I saw the Sylva Herald photo of people praising Bardo’s plan. I think the people in the photo were not from Sylva or Cullowhee, because I suspect the majority of residents agree with me.
My husband and I moved here to get away from big-city problems and congestion. We found jobs. We gave up more money for a better quality of life – a better, safer way to raise our children. And this town is full of farmers, business people, parents, artists, homeowners, vacationers and educators just like us.
Bardo hasn’t asked us what we think. Maybe he doesn’t care. But he should. We depend on Western. But Western also depends on us.
Carolyn Schmidt
Sylva
Agrees game wardens needed
To the Editor:
I am writing this letter in reference to the letter Jim Moss wrote in last week’s Sylva Herald.
I was born and raised in these mountains as well as my family, mainly in the Caney Fork and Canada communities. My lifelong hobby has been hunting, fishing and living the outdoor life in these beautiful mountains.
As far as (N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission officer) Brent Hyatt goes, wait until you yourself have had dealings with him before you put him up on a pedestal.
Hyatt and other game wardens would like the people of Jackson County to see me as being a wildlife-destroying, game-warden-hating criminal, when that is far from the true picture. I have stated all along that we do need game wardens to protect the wildlife and enforce the laws. But we need game wardens that will get along with the sportsmen and women and become a friend to us and not an enemy.
In my opinion, Mike Johnson is a good example. He treats everyone the same. He does his job. If you break the law, you get a ticket. If you haven’t, then you don’t get harassed.
Hyatt and two other wildlife officers charged me with nine charges stemming from two incidents. When those charges came before a jury, all were dropped except one that I was guilty of and told the jury so.
Several times during the trial, the game wardens tried to plea bargain, but I would not. Lawyer fees have cost me more than $10,000 out of my pocket.
Now I see where my name was used again in The Sylva Herald. I can’t keep from wondering if the shoe was on the other foot if I would be charged with harassment and slander.
Also, what happened to all the complaints and the hundreds of signatures on a petition sent to the Wildlife Commission asking for the removal of Brent Hyatt? If I had to guess, they were swept under a rug.
Keith Templeton stated in the article (in the March 17 edition) that the complaints were investigated and appropriate action taken, but they can’t let the sheriff or anyone else know the outcome. Why? Don’t the citizens of Jackson County and the people filing complaints deserve to know the outcome?
Todd Mathis
Cullowhee
(Editor’s Note: The Wildlife Commission’s Templeton told The Herald that state law prevented him from making the results of the investigation public.)
Time for land-use planning is here
To the Editor:
The controversy about the proposed shooting range on Tilley Creek is only the latest in a continuing series of land use issues in the county. Within the last few years there have been arguments about the raceway, an asphalt plant, a noisy tourist helicopter, and an apartment complex in Forest Hills, as well as dissension about various subdivisions, mobile home parks, and junkyards.
Each of these has been handled by the county commissioners on a case-by-case basis, usually late in the planning/investment process, which has meant that the commissioners have had to take time for extended and often loud hearings for each dispute. The solution has usually been some kind of cobbled-together “moratorium,” which has often required a legal opinion because of its dubious validity.
It should be becoming obvious by now that Jackson County needs some form of land use planning. We have already been experiencing land use issues, and there will only be more – and more serious – ones in the future. The process by which we are now dealing with these issues is inadequate, inefficient, and usually too late. It therefore promotes rancor, bickering, and division within the community.
There are indeed disagreements about land use priorities in the county. Land use planning would not make these go away, but it would give us a better framework to deal with these disagreements and come to viable solutions.
Land use planning is proactive, stating a vision of how we would like our community to be before planning and investments are made and disputes begin. It would give a clear statement of the community’s view of what is and what is not suitable for building in certain areas. This would make discussions calmer, quicker, and easier and would give firmer grounds for decision-making. The clearer the guidelines, the fewer the incidents that would develop to the crisis stage.
As conditions become more crowded in the valley, good land use guidelines – like good fences – will help to make good neighbors.
Our present experiences should be telling us that at this point land use planning would not be oppressive government; it would be good government.
For the benefit of the whole community, let’s develop land use guidelines now.
David Wheeler
Whittier
Shooting range not about property rights
To the Editor:
I believe in property rights. I don’t like the idea of anyone, whether it be the government or another man telling me what I can do with my property. But as strongly as I believe in property rights I also recognize that my property rights are not absolute, they have limits, they end at my property line.
I recognize that for my property rights to be valid my neighbors’ rights must also be valid. I do not have the right to use my property in a manner that limits or decreases the right of my neighbor to use his property. My rights come with a responsibility to respect my neighbor and his rights. If I assert my rights without respect for the rights of others then am I nothing more than a bully? If I believe that my ability to exercise my property rights are exclusive of any responsibility to respect my neighbors’s rights then am I not in effect saying that he that has the most strength, or power, or money has greater rights?
Our founding fathers believed that the basic rights of man were natural, that is given by God. They believed that those rights were accorded to all men not just the most powerful.They believed that rights including property rights were basic and fundamental and that the state did not exist to convey those rights but to protect them. The sole purpose of the state was to ensure the orderly exercise of our natural rights so that they might enjoyed by all exclusive of status or power.
If I believe that my rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that my rights to hold and use my property are God-given, then is it not also incumbent upon me to acknowledge one of the most important and recurring themes of Scripture? Am I not instructed over and over to first give thought to my neighbor, to respect and to cherish him? Am I given the right to pollute or destroy God’s creation? Am I given the right to steal from my neighbor whether it be his property or his peace? My rights are given not absolutely but as a gift and, I believe, they are contingent upon my obedience.
I believe in property rights and so I am ashamed and offended when I hear someone claim the protection of those rights without acceptance of the responsibilities that support those rights. Property rights do not exist within a vacuum of self-interest they thrive only in the context of community interest. Too often property rights arguments have been used to assert a right to pure selfish interest without regard for community. Property rights are cited as an argument for unrestrained greed. The protection of property rights is often claimed as a protection of the little man so it is ironic that the greatest beneficiaries of property rights organizations and the legal action they initiate are often large development corporations.
Some have argued that the controversy involving residents on Tilley Creek and the Smoke Rise Field Club is an issue of property rights. Smoke Rise, we are told, is being deprived of their property rights. They have a right to buy property and use it any way they see fit regardless of the impact on the surrounding community. They have no obligation as the new neighbor to accommodate anyone. It is interesting that some of the folks making that argument are some of the most vocal in decrying outsiders who have come to these mountains with no respect for tradition and community. Apparently telling others how they should live is acceptable in some circumstances.
I believe in property rights. I have stood for them in more than one fight in this county. This has nothing to do with property rights. This is about a group that has the money and resources to purchase a piece of property deciding that that is sufficient reason to allow them to impose their will upon their neighbors. This isn’t about rights, it is about the exercise of selfish interest without respect or regard for the concerns of others.
Mark Jamison
Cullowhee
Growth destroying area’s resources
To the Editor:
What ever happened to the Smart Growth Initiative? As I remember it, it seemed most folks wanted to preserve Jackson County’s rural quality of life.
How do the proposed Lowe’s and the campus expansion at Western Carolina University fit into that concept? What about impacts on local businesses, the infrastructure and environment? New roads? New air pollution? New runoff, silt and further degradation of our waters? New subdivisions?
There is nothing that I need that I can’t find at Roberson’s, Southern Lumber, Bryson’s or any of Sylva’s locally-owned businesses. I can also get the benefit of personal service and the years of experience that the proprietors of local stores have. I can buy a piece of rope 18 inches long, instead of “one foot or two,” as I was abruptly told at Lowe’s in Franklin.
Instead of “sweetening the pot” for Lowe’s, whose profits will leave the area, couldn’t the town encourage local entrepeneurs?
As for keeping our children at home, part of the university’s rationale for expansion, it is the nature of children to leave home. It is a joy to me that mine are exploring the world. I hope that there will be something left of the mountains when they return.
Industries and “big box” stores are common in other places and reasonably accessible to us. What we have here is uncommon and special: natural beauty, low crime, friendly folks. Let’s cherish it and not destroy it.
The Smart Growth Initiative made it look like we did not have to accept growth for growth’s sake, that we could determine the ways in which we want the area to grow economically. Was that true, or an empty promise?
Margaret Oren
Cullowhee
Town of Webster offers congratulations to SCC
To the Editor:
The Town of Webster would like to congratulate Southwestern Community College on its 40th anniversary.
From its simple beginning to the present thriving and growing school of today, this institution has contributed to this region an invaluable service: enabling young people and adults to obtain an education that might have otherwise been denied them.
It would be impossible to gauge the influence this school has had in the southwestern portion of our state and beyond.
The school has grown through the years as a result of the work of the many people involved in its history, particularly that of the people who have served in board and leadership roles.
We have observed the quiet but capable and forward-thinking leadership of Dr. Cecil Groves within recent years, and we commend him for the exciting future awaiting this school.
We wish the college continued success. We are delighted to be the hometown of Southwestern Community College!
Steve Gray
Mayor,
Town of Webster
Pressley-farm restoration is aim of newly-formed group
To the Editor:
One good thing may have come from the controversy over the proposed gun club and shooting range on Tilley Creek Road: It has sparked an interest in the old Pressley farm.
After attending the county commissioners’ meeting March 7, I took the time to find the property and was very impressed with the condition of the buildings and the potential of this landmark property. I agree the place should be a museum. I would like to enlist the interest of others who may feel as I do.
Although I no longer hunt, I used to shoot skeet and trap in my younger days and can appreciate the desire for such a facility and would not oppose one in the right location.
However, I think it would be wrong to build it on or near this unique example of a turn-of-the-century Appalachian homesite. I doubt if there is another like it in Western North Carolina.
Let us come together and find the funds to restore this property to its former condition and use it as a living example of how Jackson County used to be.
In my travels I have enjoyed and learned from visits to many restored sites. I think if an effort were made, the old Pressley farm could put Jackson County on the map and bring more tourists interested in learning about our mountain heritage.
A grassroots group has formed to pursue this effort. Watch future issues of The Sylva Herald for announcements on meeting times and places.
Harold Sims
Cullowhee |
