How's that Growth Going?

[snowcamper]

By Truth's logic, no one alive today is qualified to talk about Slavery, since they could not possibly be old enough.

I'm sure it would be quite uncomfortable to talk about the "free man of color" that was discussed on the Antiques Roadshow last night, who made furniture and was so successful at it, that he bought slaves of his own.  ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Day_(North_Carolina) )

One must wonder how to properly make up for that "past wrong"?

Regardless, "Truth" has managed to derail a topic that I started, without answering a single one of the objections, so I'll simplify it for him/her.

If we had voted for the LTT, would the county be in better or worse financial shape right now, given the reality of the present economy?

[peacefulcapitalist]

If we had the LTT, the county would be in better shape than it is now.  It may not have brought in as much as its advocates predicted, but it still would have helped.  Just because it wouldn't have helped as much as thought doesn't mean it wouldn't have helped.   

[WolfpackFan]

If we had the LTT, the county would be in better shape than it is now.  It may not have brought in as much as its advocates predicted, but it still would have helped.  Just because it wouldn't have helped as much as thought doesn't mean it wouldn't have helped.   

If it would have passed though, would plans for spending the money have already been made, and we would now find ourselves in a hole because the revenue would be lower than planned?

[A.FOMVS]

Independent Weekly cover story January 13, 2010:

Welcome to Zombieland: The aftermath of Chatham's pro-growth era
Bankrupt subdivisions, vacant developments
http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A408483

This is the legacy of former Chatham County Commissioner Bunkey Morgan, who, abetted by his growth-hungry allies, ramrodded close to 50 subdivisions through the county's planning approval process from 2002 to 2006 (2004 and prior, 2005, 2006). Morgan and company promised the developments would translate into millions of dollars in revenue for the county, sparking new school construction and other public projects

[WolfpackFan]

I bet Bunkey planned  this all along.  He knew the economy would collapse, and he could laugh at Chatham County down the road.

[snowcamper]

Once you factor in the Real estate, construction, Banking, forrestry, manufacturing, and skilled trades industries, all of which supported the housing boom, there sure are a lot of "dumb" people in this world. 

Thanks goodness we have the "coalition", which is obviously smarter than about half the other people in this country.

Now if they would just put their minds to a solution, instead of always telling us what is wrong...

Oh, that's right.  Metering our wells, instituting a Human Relations Division, passing a Civil Rights ordinance, Funding a Kiln at the Arts Incubator... all of those will/have solved our economic problems.

And the article is downright stupid.  So... we have subdivisions sitting fallow... probably growing back the nature that was cut down just a few years ago.  I fail to see the problem here...

[chathamgardener]

Snowcamper said:

And the article is downright stupid.  So... we have subdivisions sitting fallow... probably growing back the nature that was cut down just a few years ago.  I fail to see the problem here...

I feel obliged to point out “the problem” inherent in this assumption. When mature ecosystems (in these cases, mostly climax deciduous forest) are clear-cut in today’s piedmont, the “nature” that grows back is not remotely equivalent to what was removed. Of course, the plants are younger, which means all the species that relied on mature specimens (nut- and fruit-producing trees, for example) have no food. Likewise, the species that need mature trees to live and forage on (woodpeckers, hawks, owls, etc.) have no recourse but to leave the area. The effects of mature forests on local temperature regimes and other weather patterns is also well-documented.

It takes 200 years for bare land to become mature deciduous forest in the piedmont. This is not a number I pulled out of the air. This is the number botanists and ecologists have derived after prolonged studies.

But let’s pretend that these clear-cut lands actually might be given the 200 years necessary to rebuild the native ecosystems that once thrived on them. Putting aside the pressures exerted by humanity, two other factors make this outcome highly unlikely. First, the article notes the extensive erosion that has occurred on these sites. Much of the topsoil that supported forest growth is now well on its way to the Atlantic Ocean via our streams and rivers. Many native plant species need real topsoil to establish. Assuming time would eventually rebuild the soil (if continuing erosion on these lands is somehow stopped), the progression to mature forest would be significantly slowed.

But more important is the documented effect of invasive exotic species. These plant invaders (privet, elaeagnus, princess trees, Japanese honeysuckle, multiflora rose, etc.) outcompete our natives for real estate. Again, the “nature” that grows back will not be the same rich mix of natives that once flourished in these locations. Add to that the fact that the deer are eating every native sapling they spot, and native forest regeneration becomes dicey indeed.

Most ecologists today believe that our struggling native ecosystems can no longer be left alone. Natural processes are too damaged by human interference for “nature” to grow back on its own. Only active human participation as stewards of our native landscapes will offer them any hope for the future at all.

Why does this matter? This is not about tree-hugging. Significant deleterious economic impacts are already occurring. For more information, read this book: BRINGING NATURE HOME by Douglas W. Tallamy. This respected entomologist explains it far better than I can.

[snowcamper]

"Natural Processes" are too damaged for "nature" to grow back on its own?

What a crock.

Nature will do just fine with or without us.  It just might not be the same nature that was there before.  Is that really a bad thing?  Who is qualified to judge what nature "should" be in one place and not in another?  What makes one form of "nature" better than another?  Why wasn't the flora and fauna immediately following the last glacial period the "best"... or maybe the same from the time of the dinosaurs?  Should we all be planting Dawn Redwoods, Sago Palms, and Ginko's? 

Why specifically is the "environment" and "biodiversity" during your lifetime (or the lifetime of certain ancestors) the "best" and therefore worth preserving at all costs?

Since environmentalists tell us that every ecosystem from desert to rain forest is "in danger", one must wonder if any state of nature could actually be desirable.

The problem with environmentalists is that they don't seem to understand that nature is a dynamic system, and therein lies its true beauty.  The adaptability of nature:  The ability of Owls to move to a more favorable climate, the ability of new "natives" to replace old "natives".  Who is to say that 200 years ago, hardwoods didn't invade (along with those owls, thereby decimating the rodent population) and push out the "Native" scrub growth?  We are so bothered by those pesky, invasive white pines that are growing where they don't belong down there on the Deep River...

"Most ecologists believe???"... more likely "most ecologists have a financial and career interest in promoting..."  now there's a deeper truth than anything in that post.

[chathamgardener]

Snowcamper:

If you would just crack open your mind long enough to read the book I mentioned, perhaps there might be hope for a meaningful dialogue between us. The power of nature you so proudly proclaim is predicated on minimal intervention by humanity (in terms of the percent of land modified by humans). The processes that evolved over eons cannot magically modify to create new natural systems that can replace the ones now eradicated. Humanity has fundamentally changed these systems.

But I will not argue with you further about this. There is no point. Your mind is made up. It will be future generations who reap the consequences of your self-satisfied and all-knowing "wisdom".

[snowcamper]

Humanity is not the only evolutionary pressure that has happen in a short (geologically speaking) period of time.  Ice ages, fire, hurricanes, volcanoes, asteroids, disease...

Look at what is happening in the re-greening and re-naturalization of Detroit after every sane person packed up and left.

And if you ever wanted to choose a city that was touched by the hand of man...

Nature is designed to adapt, regardless of the cause.  I don't have to read a enviro-book to know and understand history.  I also don't have to read one to understand the motivations of "ecologists".

[integrityticket]

As I think back on the Bunkey's Residential Developers Paradise in Chatham County I'm reminded of Tommy Emerson's invitation to vote him and the rest of Bunkey's crew out of office if the voters did not like their policies of totally uncontrolled residential growth.  The land rush between the defeat of Bunkey and Crew in May of 2006 and when they left office in December demonstrated their commitment to uncontrolled residential development. I have not gone back to look at how many of Bunkey's land rush approved developments are now in bankruptcy.  Those that are in bankruptcy have nothing to do with the majority who took office in December 2006 or their policies implemented thereafter. 

As you remember Lucier, Vanderbect and Thompson, especially much to the chagrin of Emerson, where elected by overwhelming majorities in the May primary of 2006 and those who had opponents won substantially in November 2006. 

Once in office the new majority proceeded to implement the policies on which they were elected.  Of note was the first ethics policy for the Chatham Board of Commissioners ever passed. They acted to encourage real economic development, rational residential development, strong support for public education and protection of the watershed. Though the job is not complete the substantial majority that put them in office should be do so again in 2010 so that they can complete the job they were elected to do in 2006.

One could argue that the moratorium on massive residential development that was implemented between early 2007 to about June 2008 in Chatham saved some of our more risk taking residential developers from unfortunate investment at the peak of housing bubble from bankruptcy in the ensuring Reagan/Gramm/Bush/Cheney economic collapse of September 2008.  Just think of the number of developers in that 18 month period that would entered the residential development abyss if they could have during the moratorium on large scale residential development in Chatham. The Durham-Orange-Chatham builders association owe the county commissioners a great debt of thanks for protecting them from their unlimited financial avarice.

I don't have a complete list of developers who have gone  bankrupt in Chatham that were approved under Bunkey's and crews policies of unlimited residential development but the Parks at the Meadows come to mind and the Lysta Road and Jack Bennett Rd development that eroded the hilly landscape and polluted local streams with silt from their sites. In invite readers to add to this list of bankrupt developers.

Again the development community should thank the commissioners for protecting them from themselves and the electorate that put them in office should thank them for delivering on they election promises and protecting the quality of life in all of Chatham County.

Though Bunkey is gone Chatham is always three votes away from a majority on the Board of Commissioners that could return Chatham to Bunkey's Developer Paradise of 2002-2006.

We have been there before and never want to be there again. 

Chatham's progressive liberals focus on blame and not solutions.

[SBB]

The solution was to replace them (Bunky & crew) with people who will look after the needs of the county rather than the wants of outside developers.  Good, competent folks who believe in planning for growth before approving it and who know that we must also protect our environment for our health and farming needs.  They aren't blind to progress, just against blind progress. 

I don't believe Bunky caused all these bankruptcies, but his actions in approving so many large subdivisions in a short period (especially as many as he could before he left office), without considering the consequences of this kind of glut on the market definitely helped make the situation worse.

[Tags:]

Jump to: Please select a destination: ----------------------------- Chatham County Online ----------------------------- => Chatham County Online => Chatham County Schools => Chatham County Food & Drink => Chatham County Music & Arts => Chatham Community Calendar => Free Classifieds & Help Wanted Ads => Noah's Ark - All Creatures Great & Small. => Neighbor to Neighbor => Gardening and Agriculture => Chatham County Real Estate => North Carolina => This, That and Everything Else