For C2C - Main Topics P. Ashbaugh Notice

[lar]

Just a short summary of the "information provided by Paul Ashbaugh":

1. Mobile Homes are "a nuisance", they should be eliminated.
2. On the BR Mountain you will not be able to replace a mobile with a conventional home.
3. On the mountain you will only be able to use 10-35% of the lot you own and pay taxes on.
4. If you drive a company vehicle, you will be stopped from parking it at your home.
5. You will not be allowed to heat or air condition a utility or storage building on your property.
6. If you plan a swimming pool, you will be required to put both a fence and evergreen hedge around it. 3' tall, 3' apart for screening.
7. Farmer and Horseman: you will be required to fence all "exposed rock".
8. If you shold have a sink hole or one opens up on your property you cannot fix it. The rest of your property required to be a sink hole buffer and you will not be able to build within 300' of it.
9. Thousands of existing homes and businesses will be consider non-conforming as to min. lot sizes. Home and businesses will not be permitted to make any structural repairs to "extend or intensify the non-conforming structure"

[Jenniffer]

Paul Smith (a/k/a ASHBaugh)

Does he really have an alias?

[derricksonb]

Ahhhhhh THIS must be what they were discussing last night at Torlones re: the county commission meeting at BRE. It was quite amusing. Apparently there was also some talk of a "One Cow Per Acre" limitation which almost made me shoot beer out of my nose I was laughing so hard. Sad thing is that these people actually took it seriously, but in their defense they've probably only seen HIS propaganda and not actually researched it themselves from the commissions website.

[WVGeo]

There were some eloquent speakers last night, some of whom I disagree with but had to applaud. However, I was flummoxed by Ashbaugh. I just flat out couldn't understand what he was talking about. He obviously had passion - he just seemed incoherent to me, thought-wise.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

Yeah, Ashbaugh was a HUGE disappointment to me, too!

You know, for someone who has literally swayed public opinion multiple times, I expected more from him. I expected at the very least some sanity.

But no. The man was screaming about fascism, and all that junk.

Isn't he the same guy that has tried repeatedly to get Mannings incorporated so he can bypass the county?

[lar]

If this post is against the rules you can take it down, I think City got the message.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

I see nothing wrong with anything here, not do I see anything that is rulebreaking.

Ashbaugh OPENED HIMSELF UP for this criticism when he started handing out fliers to sway our opinions. *HE* is the only one responsible for a spotlight being shined on him. When one decides to jump into the public opinion fray, they MUST be prepared to take the bad with the good.

Too many people around here want their cake, and to eat it, too. What's going to wind up happening is that the whole cake is going to get scrapped, and nobody will have either. Except for the developers. They've had their cake all along, and have moved in to protect their frosting.

[lar]

Just a short summary of the "information provided by Paul Ashbaugh":

1. Mobile Homes are "a nuisance", they should be eliminated. questionable, they can be nice but when they wear down that aren't so nice
2. On the BR Mountain you will not be able to replace a mobile with a conventional home. that's bogus
3. On the mountain you will only be able to use 10-35% of the lot you own and pay taxes on. depends on the sq footage of lot and setbacks isn't that already in effect
4. If you drive a company vehicle, you will be stopped from parking it at your home. not going to happen
5. You will not be allowed to heat or air condition a utility or storage building on your property. how will they know or enforce? why is that even an issue?
6. If you plan a swimming pool, you will be required to put both a fence and evergreen hedge around it. 3' tall, 3' apart for screening. don't you have to do that already for insurance? requirement of hedge questionable. low priority.
7. Farmer and Horseman: you will be required to fence all "exposed rock". that's stupid, wouldn't that be worse than the exposed rock itself
8. If you shold have a sink hole or one opens up on your property you cannot fix it. The rest of your property required to be a sink hole buffer and you will not be able to build within 300' of it. fill it in, who would know, how would they enforce
9. Thousands of existing homes and businesses will be consider non-conforming as to min. lot sizes. Home and businesses will not be permitted to make any structural repairs to "extend or intensify the non-conforming structure" grandfather clause


Just my thoughts.

[STR1KER]

Let me get this straight... these bullet phrases were on this flyer ___balls", (I f'n LOVE THAT), was handing out prior to the meeting last night?

Is dude on crack??? And WHY would the public actually BELIEVE this stuff? He can't actually think the residents of this mtn are THAT un-edu-medi-cated to not know the difference between what ACTUALLY is legit (NONE OF WHAT'S ON THAT FLYER), and what's bogus, (The WHOLE DAMNED THING)....

I wasn't there, and I wished to hell I could've been. after hearing what I heard at the courthouse yesterday, and then reading what I'm seeing since I got home from Springfield last night, it SERIOUSLY looks like it was a huuuuugggeeee propaganda confusion scam to screw a ligit meeting w/ mtn residents and the JCC.

If this is all time sensitive stuff, and someone throws a wrench in to confuse and make people drift off issues that aren't legit in the 1st place, that's a perfect way to F up a meeting.

I'm starting to think that I missed this for a reason - so I'd have an outside objective view.... I'm putting things together here, and me smells a seriously rotten skunk....

Knowing damned well that there were large and small developers at the county clerk's office on Mon and Wed., hearing those remarks in the hall way, seeing that this guy's put out misleading flyers? It's a DAMNED good thing I wasn't at that meeting.... They'd've hauled me off for verbal abuse!

[Chutney Daftcraft]

Let me get this straight... these bullet phrases were on this flyer "___balls", (I f'n LOVE THAT), was handing out prior to the meeting last night?

Is dude on crack??? And WHY would the public actually BELIEVE this stuff? He can't actually think the residents of this mtn are THAT un-edu-medi-cated to not know the difference between what ACTUALLY is legit (NONE OF WHAT'S ON THAT FLYER), and what's bogus, (The WHOLE DAMNED THING)....

Uh huh. That's the thing. The development interests have rated our collective intelligence at "Dukes of Hazzard" levels. Unfortunately, with the results of their fear mongering, many of us fit into that. Striker, you have to understand that Ashbaugh GOT TO THEM VERY WELL. He hit them where it hurts, and appealed to what he knew would sway them to his side. This is a dirty war.

So, if the "housing everywhere" folks want to hit home to us, then the "open spacers" should fight fire with fire.

Look at the results of Ashbaugh's appeal to their property rights! That subject hit home to most of the mountain.

Now, the "open spacers" need to hit back in a place that is *more* effective than property rights. Think about it, what is the one thing that us mountainfolk cherish MORE than our property rights?

Our privacy. The "open spacers" need to let everyone know how much their privacy will be affected by over-populating this mountain.

[STR1KER]

I think the reason so many people also jumped on the bandwagon here, is because ___balls has been here for years. He's a "mountain man", and he USED to be a decent guy.

What people don't realize is that the developers and $$$$$ changed him. He's not about conservation anymore, he's all about the mighty GD dollar, and what he can do to SCREW US.

We haveta come up w/ a way to explain to the people of this mtn that the "Mr. Nice" Paul Ashbaugh, IS NOT who we've known for years anymore, and he's sleepin' in bed w/ Snakey Snyder.

Looks like someone got smashed by his own landslide, on the "road" he so fittingly self-named, and someone ELSE came out from under those boulders... It's DISGUSTING.

Ya know, that's been there for years now - that road leading up to a so-called "development"...

Perhaps we can use that to our advantage for a LOT of things... Think about it...
*The fact it's been there for a while, and looks like total crap:
(WHO WANTS THIS NEAR THEIR BEAUTIFUL HOME?? It's an EYESORE.)
*The fact that "road" caused a landslide:
(PERFECT EXAMPLE OF SHODDY CONSTRUCTION & WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN IMPROPER BUILDING AND STEEP SLOPES COMBINE)

There's just 2 examples off the top of my head right there, I'm sure others can come up w/ the perfect example of how "great" a developer he is...

Yup, yer right... It needs to go along the privacy/conservation lines...

Just as an example of loss of privacy... For some, this might be a bit of TMI, but screwit LOLOL
I can rem my dad pissin' off the deck when we'd get home from a long trip, just cos Mom n I would take both bathrooms.
Now since we have all of the neighbors around, that's just not possible anymore....

SO... I say we start our OWN "pissing" match, (since this IS a war of sorts...)

The headline could read something like:

Mountain Residents Pissed:
Protection of Privacy & Conservation ACCEPTED!
___ball Associates DECLINED!

[Willis]

for the record, con't: almost all the scare tactcs were debunked-e.g. the mobile home, reference fencing around rock breaks and sinkholes, etc were debunked:They had already been removed from the proposal or were acknowledged as not practical or common sense. That is why anyone with an issue needs to put it in writing or attend a meeting to put it on public record. There WILL be more hearings next year.

And go easy on the play on names- it lowers the discussion to a level we don't tolerate on the forum. I'd respectfully ask the offenders to edit post and replace an ess with an aitch.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

I would like to state for the record:

It was foolishly ignorant to include *ANY* language about "work trucks" in that proposed ordinance. That was a stupid move, and in my opinion, will be the ultimate reason for this failing if it does.

I would say that was unfreindly, but instead, I'm saying that it was hostile towards home-based businesses on this mountain. Because most of them are contractor-based, requiring panel vans, worktrucks, and heavy equipment. I don't blame Bo (Melvin) Baker (who, BTW is MY excavator) for standing up for his RIGHT to park HIS equipment on HIS property.

Now, I love blaming Ashbaugh for this misinformation campaign, but I have to say, his misinformation campaign would not have been possible if some of this language was not in the proposed ordinance in the first place!

[STR1KER]

Well, I'm certainly glad that items were debunked and removed.

I was speaking w/ Teresa via PM last night. If I can't make Sat's mtg, I'll def have to and more than likely WILL write anyway, my thoughts upon the whole freakin' thing.

I can't make Mon's cos KDawg's got his JHS band concert that night, so Sat.'s penciled on my schedule. I'm hoping I can make it perm marker. I should know Fri. nite after my gig.

[Kensey]

Here are some ramblings from my brain that I just penned to send off to the county commission.


Having attended the 12 Dec meeting, commented, and had a chance to observe and ask questions, there are a few things that jump out at me about reaction to and the text of the proposed ordinances.

1) Many, many people are concerned about existing structures, areas and activities being grandfathered, and the ordinances often do not explicitly state that they will (or won't) be. This leads to the ability of "concerned citizens" like Paul Ashbaugh to play on residents' fears of not being able to remediate damage to existing improvements, or no longer being able to run the business they depend on for their livelihood.

The ordinances should state explicitly what will be grandfathered and what, if anything, will not. In particular, they should state what "non-conforming" home-based businesses will be allowed to continue, and what non-conforming and other improvements will be allowed to be remediated or rebuilt in the event of damage and how that will or won't affected allowed disturbance percentages. Depending on people to believe in the good intent of the commission is bound to fail, particularly as commissions change and so can their intent.

2) There needs to be a focus on local effects of not passing these ordinances. Much was made of the fact that none of the presentation photos of landslide damage was from Jefferson County. People need to see examples of what has happened and can happen here. Shannondale has many examples of mudflows from improper clearing and excavation -- Paul Ashbaugh's own project on Ashbaugh Road is a huge eyesore that has caused earth movement and uglies up my drive home every single night.

Send somebody out around Shannondale, Blue Ridge Acres, etc. with a camera to document these development mishaps. If the county can't send somebody, I'll see what I can find in Shannondale and send to the county. It would also be nice to note at what point the mountain is likely to require public water and sewer because of excessive building and/or clearing. That might require a full engineering study; even so it would help people see that these are not just arbitrary numbers pulled out of a hat, but have a real basis in the geology and physics of the area. Some photographic documentation of where all that runoff and sediment is ultimately ending up (i.e., the Shenandoah River) would make the point eloquently.

3) As pointed out by several people last night, there are things that can be done to mitigate the effects of excavation and the risk of landslides, and the ordinances should recognize that and reward people for doing it properly. Currently any yahoo with a backhoe and time to kill can dig a hole in the yard and affect groundwater and topsoil far downslope. The proposed ordinances still don't say anything about how he can dig his hole, just how big a hole he can dig. Maybe there should be an allowable-disturbance bonus (say 2.5% of total lot size or 100 square feet, whichever is greater) for proper excavation, and a further bonus of an equal amount for taking substantial steps to reduce overall landslide risk on a lot, such as those summarized here:

http://www.aspectconsulting.com/geotechnical/landslide_repair.html

4) The ordinances' critics are vocal and put themselves in the public eye. Those of us who are basically in favor are working to counter their misinformation and help see that legitimate concerns are addressed, but it would be helpful if the consultant who helped draft the ordinance and the council who will pass it could be as visible and active on this issue as the people in opposition. I know the county council probably can't stand on streetcorners handing out flyers, but some kind of periodic media announcement that seeks people out rather than them having to seek out the message would work well.

[Tony]

And go easy on the play on namesI'll go a bit further and remind everyone to not disrespect others in any way.

You can disagree with his ideas, and post about it all day, but let's not lower ourselves to name calling.

S&B welcomes differing views as well; same rules apply.

[Jenniffer]

I agree with #3, especially, Kensey. Folks seem to be so distrustful of the science involved wrt landslides and debris flows, that concrete examples that they can see with their own eyes are bound to be helpful.

[WVGeo]

I've got the pics I gave to Mr. Redman scanned and on a backup disk somewhere if they would be useful. They don't have the slide, per se, because it was raining like heck when I took them and I wasn't inclined to go out in it, but they show the amount of water that comes off the mountain since the houses went in above us. And if this storm that's coming in ends up a rain event rather than snow I can get more - our own little mountain torrent will be coming down full force.

[John]

I kind of like Mr. Ashbaugh. I don't often agree with him, and I will admit that he does not always come across as well as even he might want to. But he is an effective advocate for his point of view.

I feel strongly that the problems we have seen with some of his projects on the Mountain are caused by the confusing and insufficient county ordinances that he has been operating under. I am also aware of instances in the past where he has been singled out and treated unfairly by the county planning department, (prior to Mr. Redman's tenure). Everyone should be treated fairly and given the same opportunities, regardless of the size of their business. I think Mr. Ashbaugh was sometimes discriminated against because of where he is from and because he did not come into the planning office with a pocket full of lawyers. Large out of state developers were given special treatment that smaller builders were not.

Ashbaugh Lane off of Route 9 is a huge problem, but the current ordinances allowed it and the county gave no advice or guidance that could have prevented it. From the amount of work that he seems to be continuing to put into it I would bet that it is costing him a fortune that would not have been necessary had proper ordinances been in place when he started.

I know that Mr. Ashbaugh and many other small builders in the county are opposing the new ordinance. I don't think they should be. The Mountain ordinance as it is currently proposed will give a competitive advantage to small builders that have better knowledge of the area, have access to local, highly skilled tradesman, and are not relying on a cookie cutter mass production model of building. The big out of state builders seem to always clear cut and level everything before they start.

The local builder that we used when we built five years ago was able to work around trees that are within 15 feet of our house. Compare that to Mission Ridge or Harvest Hills on Route 9. The smaller builders also tend to work with local excavators that have a better knowledge of the ground and are more willing to take the extra time necessary to lay out a septic field that does not require clear cutting and leveling.

[Jenniffer]

John,

Thank you for providing some insight into Mr. Ashbaugh's motivations. I centainly have a greater appreciation for his positions and where he's coming from. Has anyone sat down with him to talk about these issues? Should we invite him to brunch? ;)

[derricksonb]

John, I second that Thank You from Jenniffer and agree, based on what I witnessed last night at Torlones, that Mr Ashbaugh is very persuasive in representing his point of view, and effective in whipping the masses into near hysteria, but it needs to be done in a fair and objective way as opposed to the disinformation/fear campaign he is alledgedly spearheading.

Jenniffer I think a brunch/dinner with Mr Ashbaugh would be excellent, but only if we can invite Mr Snyder, a few of the county Commissioners (Mrs Morgan, Mr Surkamp and Mr Manuel) and perhaps a few other "local" contractors to get a better understanding of their position in regards to the proposal. What's in it for them? What possibible impacts will countywide ordinances have on growth in other areas of the county? How will these restrictions will affect the livlihood of local contractors, builders, handymen and tradesmen?

It's obvious to some of us that issues that directly affect the mountain do not necessarily apply to other areas of the county.

[Starbuck]

I agree with City's very logical argument that development restrictions would actually increase property values. Also, restrictions on the type/size of building allowed do not lend themselves to "cookie cutter" houses a la Dan Ryan et. al. So, wouldn't the proposed ordinances actually benefit local builders, because they know the lay of the land and can help people creatively build on their land? Certainly there's value in this? Maybe not vs. volume, but value nonetheless?

[John]

Jennifer,

I appreciate your recomendation and certainly would follow up on it, but I really am trying to lead a healthier lifestyle these days. Brunch can be so heavy on the cholesterol.

[Cissey]

Considering Mr.Ashbaugh's behavior last night and his ranting and ravings, if anything he lost supporters. As Willis mentioned there were rebuttals to most of his misinformation.

Did anyone notice the other "heavy hitters in the audience -- say the Kable boys for example"?

[Chutney Daftcraft]

I'd like to order the fascist fruit pancakes, with a side of rightsberry syrup.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

Ashbaugh and Kable have nothing but benefit from this.

Unless there is something that they are not telling us!

[Theresa]

I didn't see the Kables - Marty and Gary? (PSD Member and BOE member)

We did see Herb (brother of LEE) Snyder, Herb used to be a Senator

Cam Tabb ( who at this very moment is bending the Commissioners ears about what changes HE wants to see in the Ordinances) His wife Jane Tabb lost her County seat 2006.

Gail and Ed Boober - Magistrate and current Sherriff

Don Orser - owner of hundreds of empty lots on the Mountain

Orser is the only one who actually lives on the Mountain. I wonder what brought them out .......?

[Theresa]

Forgot to mention - Marty Kable was not reappointed to the Public Service District during today's CC meeting.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

Orser is the only one who actually lives on the Mountain. I wonder what brought them out .......?

Ashbaugh also lives on the mountain, in a very, very nice all-brick home that I would kill my mother to have.

[STR1KER]

The man I grew up knowing, is the man John described above.

The man I've recently been seeing and hearing, is NOT. Fear mongering was never something he'd use to gain backing. He'd also NEVER align himself w/ someone like "Snakey Snyder".

I'd really like to believe that the GOOD one is still in there somewhere.

I'd also love to see "SMART" builders. There's nothing wrong w/ even taking a few classes, (if they have or want to), to learn how to INCORPORATE the land they develop.

Perhaps before any further construction starts, for ANY builder/developer, certain guidelines must be met by geographical and environmental standards. This includes anything that's been proposed, but has not yet broken ground.

As far as a meeting, I think it's an excellent idea provided that everyone's on the up and up w/ no mis-information, and everyone's treated fairly and equally. The idea of "stupid mountain people" needs to be EXTINGUISHED.

We're a VERY aware community, and it goes way beyond money for us. we LIVE here, they just develop it, get the cash, and bail on to their next project.

It would be nice to see a builder/developer/geographical/environmental GROUP to come together to see what's available and how to go about planning etc...

There IS a way to do it, but RUSHING and FEAR campaigns are NOT the way.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

The man I grew up knowing, is the man John described above.

The man I've recently been seeing and hearing, is NOT. Fear mongering was never something he'd use to gain backing. .

I'm tellin ya, you can easily "get him back" to OUR side, and I think Jennifffffffffer's idea was the best one yet for it! The man *can't* be the raving lunatic I met last night!

The first thing we need to do is have the trailer and work truck language stricken. The trailer language is already done, so we're halfway there.

[STR1KER]

Ya know what I'd absolutely LOVE to see?

I would LOVE to see the most ecologically built and developed land w/ everything being of a "green" nature.

I would LOVE to see this county REALLY change it up and for ANYTHING to be built in JeffCo, it HAS to be ecologically sound, and smartly built.

I'd actually write a heart-felt "THANK YOU" to each member of the JCC AND the builder/developer if they were to institute that.

I suppose it depends on how much $ they'd make from it, and here's the thing... The majority of people now days WANT "green" communities. So, what if they had a challenge set forth by residents...

If you want to build, you HAVE to build "green", and if you can't, then you lose out...

Times are changing, and so do designs. Anyone worth their salt should be able to adapt to this way of thinking and building.

Think about how many homes (spec) have been built and aren't selling... It's not just the market that sucks, it's the fact that these McMansions aren't cost-effective. Perhaps changing the strategies would put a positive spin on the idea as a whole, and everyone would "win".

[Jenniffer]

I really do think that Ashbaugh might not be seeing the points that John mentioned, but I can only go by what he said last night, as that's all I know of him. The trick would be getting him to admit the real reasons for his opposition to the ordinances.

[STR1KER]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[WVGeo]

Trouble is, being really "green" is still extremely expensive. That is changing as there is a push for cheaper solar cells, etc., but right now that would push housing way out of most people's league.

[lar]

Kable as in Kable Excavating the ones that are contracted to do the clear cutting and who appear to be the major local site developers in Jefferson County?

[lar]

From what I have heard some of the plats and property markers on the mountain are already questionable it would be a fiasco to try and come up here and enforce usable land restrictions because they are all weird shapes and sizes and not "cookie cutter" configuration. I worked for Hampton at the height of construction in Shannondale and I have seen every plat of Shannondale at one time or another, take that and the topography and you have a mess.

[STR1KER]

Completely green, yes... it's VERY expensive. However, as far as land management, and the simple common sense stuff, it's hardly expensive at all....
Even if some items do cost more, ya get back what you'd be paying in electric alone over a period of time.
Items as easy as:
*Leaving trees in place for shade instead of clear cutting.
*For every angle where there would be drainage, install water collecting devices, there are a lot to choose from.
*Don't pave the driveway, there are other alternatives, and if you must pave, install a water collecting device at the grade.
*Put one skylight in the room the buyer would use the most, such as a living room or kitchen.
*Put windows on the house that will allow the most light in the house.

It's simple stuff like this that "some" builders don't think about.... They build it up, get the cash and move forward to the next project.

If we were to set it up and have the builders. developers, and JCC acknowledge & understand, that we will not stand for anything less than "green building standards", then we could set a precedent for the rest of the county, retain what we already have, and promote higher standards for the builders/developers.

If you want the business, we'd be happy to meet you, but here are some simple guidelines to follow. In the end, it might actually be an eye opener for some builders/developers to expand their imagination, and get away from the "cookie-cutter/McMansion" thing.

***EDIT POST*** In response to Lar's posts - Yup, they're also going to have to accept the fact that due to topography, not ALL land is build-able. It really has nothing to do w/ perk tests, it has everything to do w/ slopes, grades, mountainous rock formations, etc. This is NOT the flatlands, and I don't think everyone "gets" that just yet.

[WVGeo]

A couple of things on my mind from last night -

1) There were a lot of people whose response to the idea of a landslide seemed to be "There's never been one here, so that's nonsense." True there's not been a bad one here, but we have to get people to understand that every stripped lot on a slope increases the probability that there WILL be one. If we wait until we have a landslide for demo purposes, which is the logical end of that way of thinking, it's a tad too late. Standing around looking at the damage and going "Well, dang, I guess we can have them here after all" won't be helpful.

2) It's not just stripping the lots - I'm sure the guy who bought at the top at Mad Hatter thought he was buying a nice wooded lot. Then a bunch of his trees died and now his lot is a nice stumped lot. It looks like when the lot was leveled the root systems were damaged. I'm sure it wasn't deliberate - but the trees are dead none the less.

3) There were also several people who said "There's ways of handling that to control erosion." That's fine - I'm sure there are. The point is - it's not being done. It's no good to talk about good procedures if those good procedures aren't being used by the people doing the work.

4) A totally different subject - for whatever you think of the County folks who were up there last night, there ain't enough money in the world that would have gotten me to sit up there and take some of the abuse they did without losing their composure. For that I think they should be commended - there are plenty of news reports where such gatherings deteriate into verbal and sometime physical confrontations. On the other hand, it make me wonder about the sanity of someone who deliberately chooses to live with their foot stuck in a hornets nest!:)

Well, at least 4 things on my mind...

[Nanuk]

Anyone who remembers Ashbaugh's very nasty campaign but ultimately to defeat three anti-growth members of the county commission last election knows that he's not going to let little things like honesty or ethical behavior stand between him and convincing a majority of uninformed voters to give him what he wants at the polls. Remember his parking junker cars with billboards attached at the end of Mission road every week-end for a month and a half? He was mad because those candidates blocked his efforts to defoliate half the mountain so he transformed our end of Mission Road into an extension of Mannings with his dogpatch advertising campaign and ultimately he got his way I suspect for no reason other than the fact that everyone saw his signs and flyers so often that they voted against these three without even knowing why.

Expect more of that from him if he's not allowed to develop large sections of the mountain and profit personally by taking away the very rustic nature of the community that most everyone else moved here for.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

I do NOT get Ashbaugh. Is anyone familiar with his house?

I swear, the man left EVERY tree he possibly could have, sacrificing space for a lawn and everything else! I cannot even imagine where his septic field is. HIS HOUSE is a PERFECT MODEL of how things SHOULD be developed on this mountain.

Therefore, I know he knows how to do it. That's what's so frustrating.

But here's my *opinion* of Ashbaugh: He's not fighting the ordinances at all. He's fighting the government. He's the same man who tried to incorporate Mannings when zoning laws were first introduced to Jefferson County. He's avidly against government involvement in our lives, and views this as such.

I'd also like to point out that a fascist government would never have had a public input meeting for anything that they want to do... That's not how fascism works.

[Theresa]

Geo - I totally agree on everything you have said, but want to particularly highlight your comments about the Commissioners and Tony Redman, the Director who did the presentation.

I think think the Commissioners truly deserve to be credited for this effort to get sensible ordinances passed in the county. I've gone to earlier zoning meetings and the amount of pressure and abuse they take from the public is extraordinary. Understand that it is overwhelmingly land speculators, farmers who want to develop and lawyers who stand to make money who are leading the charge against them.

These meetings were set up for the public to give comment and the Commissioners to listen. I think they are doing a commendable job.

Further - I think Tony Redman was incredible . His presentation was clear and understandable and he handled a sometimes hostile audience capably.
They are so lucky to have found this guy to get them through this process.

[STR1KER]

Expect more of that from him if he's not allowed to develop large sections of the mountain and profit personally by taking away the very rustic nature of the community that most everyone else moved here for.

I can hardly call that CONSTANT SCAR on the side of the mtn "development".
Development means starting a project and finishing it, and it has YET to be finished. I'd like to see THAT taken care of prior to him starting anything else up here. Goddess FORBID his "development" on this mtn ends up scarring it as badly as the wound he's already created.

[Jenniffer]

Reminder that if you want to sign the petition (http://www.shannondale.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7049) re: mountain preservation, or have signatures that I can take with me to the meeting Saturday please stop by DogPatch tonight (PM me for directions) or PM me so that I can have as many signatures as possible to present tomorrow.

[Willis]

Anyone who remembers Ashbaugh's very nasty campaign but ultimately to defeat three anti-growth members of the county commission last election knows that he's not going to let little things like honesty or ethical behavior stand between him and convincing a majority of uninformed voters to give him what he wants at the polls....

I don't mean to nitpick, Nanuk. You are perfectly correct about the circumstances but that campaign was to defeat 3 incumbent school board members. Those three were ardent supporters of the impact fees that are now being used to mitigate the tax burden on existing residents to accommodate new students and the schools necessary to house them. And his(Ashbaugh's) precariously(in some cases) parked truck with sign was VERY effective in putting the message "in our faces".
(btw, the impact fees are in most cases 1/3 to 1/5 of those required builders in nearby counties in MD & VA-Imho, a small burden on the many buyers who were recently purchasing mini-McMansions for nearly 500K)

[Leprechaun]

I can hardly call that CONSTANT SCAR on the side of the mtn "development".
Development means starting a project and finishing it, and it has YET to be finished. I'd like to see THAT taken care of prior to him starting anything else up here. Goddess FORBID his "development" on this mtn ends up scarring it as badly as the wound he's already created.

Ditto!

(There should have been ordances in place that would have prevented him from ruining that part of the mountain!!!)

[WVGeo]

So help me to understand the thinking around here. There is strong opposition to impact fees. I assume there is also strong opposition to increased taxes. But many of the same people who vocally oppose those are the ones who make their livings building new houses for people to live in and are as vigorous in the pursuit of that right as they are in opposing the fees and taxes.

Sooooo - how do they think the roads, emergency services, schools, etc. that are necessary for the people that move into those new houses will be provided?

[Chutney Daftcraft]

I kida have to say, in full perspective, this mountain was very natural before it was "scarred" with the existing developments like Shannondale, Keyes Ferry, Blue Ridge, etc.

On the other side of the spectrum, I kinda have to wonder who we are to be saying that people can't build here and live here like we do. If we come at it from a "stop building on our mountain" viewpoint, it most likely will make us look very exclusive, completely the opposite of this very friendly mounatin.

[WVGeo]

On the other side of the spectrum, I kinda have to wonder who we are to be saying that people can't build here and live here like we do.

It's not a comfortable position to be in, but you have to remember that all environments have a limit as to how large a population it can sustain, whether it be human or otherwise. It's not just about pretty trees - it's about how those pretty trees allow how many humans to live up here. After you hit the "how many" number, those that were fortunate enough to get here before then are just that - fortunate.

[Willis]

...Sooooo - how do they think the roads, emergency services, schools, etc. that are necessary for the people that move into those new houses will be provided?


Unfortunately, Geo., there seems to be an insurmountable disconnect/misconception among the public that:

more houses built=more money=lower taxes
for the county & its residents.
There may be some disagreement on the figures but ALL reliable sources agree that for each residence built the County loses money.
Get this universal truism into your noggins:
more houses=higher taxes
That's why we need

1) more businesses(whose buildings and warehouses don't go to school),
2) to retain our farms and open spaces(cows and alfalfa don't go to school 0r call 9-1-1)
3) Charge newcomers, whose presence will require schools, police/fire/emt services, and other amenities, "fees" for the "impact" they will have on those already here.


Most developers/builders(those "big dogs" like Dan Ryan, Ryan, Arcadia, Toll Bros, etc) pass impact fees on to the buyers of their $3-500K mini-Mcmansions. They don't live here, their kids go to Episcopal, Landon, St.Albans, and they spend 1/2 their time in Belize or Aspen. Why do small scale, local builders object to these big guys paying the most of the freight for a better environment in which to sell homes? Are impact fees pro-rated based on the sales price of the home? If not, should they be? I'd like to hear the answers. I want to be more informed. I've said it before and I'll repeat: This is an open forum and we accept opinions from all sides of a discussion.

[Kensey]

On the other side of the spectrum, I kinda have to wonder who we are to be saying that people can't build here and live here like we do. If we come at it from a "stop building on our mountain" viewpoint, it most likely will make us look very exclusive, completely the opposite of this very friendly mounatin.

That's exactly where I ended up. My concerns are landslides, drainage, and the unavoidable ill effects of clearcutting. If somebody wants to come in and build a 6000-square-foot house on a 1/4-acre lot that will not negatively affect anyone else's property, I say bully for them and welcome to the neighborhood. But, we all know two things:

1) You can only build so much on a lot of a certain size, particularly where a storm drain network doesn't exist such as Shannondale.

2) You can only build so much in an area before you will start affecting the environment no matter what you do.

That's why I think there ought to be a bonus allowable-disturbance area for using building and landscaping that helps control the runoff and instability that go with cookie-cutter tract-house style development. You can't build lots of McMansions in a rural, mountainous area like ours -- you just can't, because the infrastructure in the form of buried electric cables, public water, sewer and storm drainage, etc. just isn't there to support it. It's not even the slope, although that's also a concern, it's the things we simply don't have and don't want here that are required. Aesthetics is way down on the list, far below safety and finances.

[Jenniffer]

When you come out to DogPatch tonight (Friday) to sign the petition, be prepared to meet Santa Claus (http://www.shannondale.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7053), too!

[OzGirl]

Continuing with what kensey and willis have bought up - impact fees should be scaled according to land disturbance (and/or housing sqft size) - the bigger the house the bigger the impact....it would also encourage people away from mini-mansions.

[STR1KER]

Thank you Kensey! You just nailed what I was sayin' :)

You can build, but build smart!

However, before anyone builds ANYTHING south of Rt 9 on Mission, SOMEONE has to come up w/ an escape plan.

I still say a pontoon bridge that can be dropped across to Avon Bend from the springs, and stored up at the Air Nat'l Guard in the 'Burg, but who am I to come up w/ an idea that would work? LOLOLOL

[Leprechaun]

But how are impact fees derived? By square foot or by person? Or both?

Say a retired couple and a family with seven both buy a 4,000 sq. ft. home. Which home carries the greater impact? Obviously, the home with more people, ... more schools and school buses, more running the kids to soccer and such, more trips perhaps to the stores and restaurants.

Should the retired couple pay as much as the big family?

[Kensey]

But how are impact fees derived? By square foot or by person? Or both?

Say a retired couple and a family with seven both buy a 4,000 sq. ft. home. Which home carries the greater impact? Obviously, the home with more people, ... more schools and school buses, more running the kids to soccer and such, more trips perhaps to the stores and restaurants.

Should the retired couple pay as much as the big family?

The easy answer is: Both.

There should be an assessment per person, and one based on square footage. Many tolls are like this -- there's a minimum for just using the road, and you pay more if you're a big vehicle like a panel truck or a semi. You don't get a break on the minimum toll for driving a motorcycle, because you still take up substantially the same road space as a small car and not that much less than a big car (at least, you do if you and everyone around you are maintaining adequate buffer zones).

In your example, there would be, let us say, an impact fee of $1 a square foot, plus $1000 for every person over one (I have no idea what a typical impact fee runs, but I'm assuming we're trying to offset their impact over the expected life of the home so I'm setting these in the thousands). So the retired couple pays $5000 while the family of seven (you meant a family with five kids, right?) pays $10,000.

Where this gets problematic is what happens if the big family are the heirs of the retired couple, who die and will everything to them? Now you have a situation where a "low-impact" house has suddenly become very high-impact. The obvious answer to that one is to have the square-footage impact fee assessed against the builder (who presumably passes it on), and the per-person impact fee assessed at every sale or transfer. But now what we have is more like a builder's fee and a really weird real-estate sales tax than a simple impact fee. And what about situations where a large extended family gradually accretes around a patriarch with no transfer of property to trigger an assessment?

These are hard questions and so it appears that the path of least resistance is to punt and assess one large fee at the time of building, such that on average it all works out. The inevitable consequence is that small families are getting shafted relative to bigger families living in the same space.

[STR1KER]

And someone please dumb this whole thing as to why builders are up in arms about this "impact fee" thing, when they just pass it off to begin w/?

[Leprechaun]

Maybe the state can re-write it's tax code. Everyone should get a single exemtion (say $10,000) and it would be reduced by $2,000 for each additional exemption claimed. And for each exemption claimed beyond the one the state would give that money back to the county where the taxpayer is domiciled.

[Leprechaun]

And someone please dumb this whole thing as to why builders are up in arms about this "impact fee" thing, when they just pass it off to begin w/?

Possibly a cash flow issue. Pay the fee when the building permit is issued but not get reimbursed until months later!!!

(Hey Paul Ashbaugh, please chime in!)

[STR1KER]

Well, if it's THAT much of an issues, perhaps they should re-consider their line of work... It's called PAY TO PLAY - get used to it!
I'm off to my gig ;) Howl l8ron :)

[Willis]

So many variables so many choices. Keep it simple. When I worked with the Health Department I heard the same arguments- we're just a poor decrepit pair of geezers who won't use much water at all. Why do we have to put in a great big septic system(substitute impact fee here)?

Next trip by the house and it's occupied by that widow woman with a dozen kids who's inherited from the geezers who kicked the bucket right after moving in. That did happen(though not with a dozen kids, just the son and wife with 5 ankle biters).

The lesson is that you would have to couple the fee to the maximum reasonable capacity. Reasonable because there's no way to predict circumstances such as Fairfax is experiencing with half a dozen families moving into makeshift apartments in mini-McMansions.

NOW ATTENTION
Impact fees have nothing to do with the zoning ordinance changes being considered at this juncture. It's a separate issue. But I do feel that a home like we on the Blue Ridge all pass headed into Chas.Town on Rt9 at the entrance to Mission Ridge out to pay more freight than a modest rancher in West Ridge Hills. But that's for a later time. No matter what type of home nor its size will change the effects of a delayed ambulance, the effects of a debris flow or the rate of evacuation in the face of a wildfire.

[lar]

Sooooo - how do they think the roads, emergency services, schools, etc. that are necessary for the people that move into those new houses will be provided?

Small builders could care less about that. The impact fees of $10,000 cut straight into their profit margin.

The big builders, like my company, are the ones who build the turning lanes, the schools, the athletic fields, etc. They are proffers for being allowed to build the communities. The problem is I don't think Jefferson Co. is quite up to speed on getting what they deserve out of the big builders.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

Small builders could care less about that. The impact fees of $10,000 cut straight into their profit margin.

The big builders, like my company, are the ones who build the turning lanes, the schools, the athletic fields, etc. They are proffers for being allowed to build the communities. The problem is I don't think Jefferson Co. is quite up to speed on getting what they deserve out of the big builders.

You are SPOT-ON!

Yes, the big builders *DO* make the neccesary local improvements in other places, like all along Rte 9. Don't think the DOT made those left turn lanes...

And builders down there donate tracts of land to the parks departments, etc.

The problem is that Jefferson County just rolls over, and takes it up the starfish for them. Then they get to build what they do in VA, just without the added expense of making neccesary surrounding improvements, such as turning lanes, bus stops, parks, etc.

[Starbuck]

Well then maybe the developers should take it upon themselves to build our four-lane highway and create us an evacuation plan...then maybe we wouldn't care if the county continued to take it up the starfish. :thumbsup:

[STR1KER]

Well Stated!

[lar]

I don't think they are going to volunteer to do it unless it is part of their master planned community. Martinsburg Station is one of our projects.

[LazerFlash]

Continuing with what kensey and willis have bought up - impact fees should be scaled according to land disturbance (and/or housing sqft size) - the bigger the house the bigger the impact....it would also encourage people away from mini-mansions.
But how are impact fees derived? By square foot or by person? Or both?Should the retired couple pay as much as the big family?Logically, that makes sense - after all, it is an infrastrutuce impact fee, right? But they aren't pro-rated like that anywhere else around here... You'll recall that even the developers of Huntfield weren't able to get the waiver they wanted for the Planned Adult section of their community, because ultimately, there was no way to guarantee enforcement that there would never be children living in those houses.
And someone please dumb this whole thing as to why builders are up in arms about this "impact fee" thing, when they just pass it off to begin w/?It's very, very simple.... every dollar that any builder - big or small - spends upfront is either absorbed as a cost of business or passed on to the purchaser. Bigger builders can easily absorb the extra cost involved simply because of economies-of-scale in other areas of their business and the sheer volume of that business. Smaller builders, OTOH, cannot offset this and it ends up eating a bigger slice of the profit - the profit that actually pays their personal bills, not going to share-holders or to finance vacation trips to Aspen or Belize.

Let's try this to maybe put it into a different perspective: Your employer asks you to pay a set fee (not a percentage or floating fee) for some service s/he provides to you, himself and all other employees, regardless of salary level. (To really light the fire, let's say that it's something like full family health coverage - regardless of whether you're a single, a couple, an older person whose family is grown or a family of six. ) For you, somewhat down the company's 'food chain', that fee might be 25% of your salary, but it's only 15% of your manager's and maybe only 5% of the big boss's. (Crude and rough analogy, I know... but it works for me.)


Reasonable because there's no way to predict circumstances such as Fairfax is experiencing with half a dozen families moving into makeshift apartments in mini-McMansions.You know, it's funny you should say that, because in Fairfax County, it's not just the mini-McMansions where that was happening. Just as we were leaving Northern Virginia, one of our neighbors was unbelievably sub-dividing his three-level townhouse so there'd be a studio apartment in the basement and two separate apartments in the main and upper levels. Note that this was not a big unit and it started life 30 years ago as a three bedroom, 1.5 bath townhouse with unfinished basement. I don't know what ultimately happened, as there was a stop-work injunction issued literally the day we moved. However, having discussed such multi-family issues for years at HOA Board meetings, with the Town Council and at the County level, there was probably very little that the government could do to prevent it.