Land Use, Change, and Development Rights

Monday, July 13, 2009 3:41 PM

The County has changed in the last 20 years: agriculture use has declined, while residential developments replace former pastures, farms and open spaces. Non-residential uses are scattered throughout the county to serve a sprawling population.  These changes happen because people exercise their legal ability to alter the existing land use of their property. Growth and development are often seen as desirable, as they indicate the County is attractive to those willing to invest in the new development.

But there are those who do not share the enthusiasm for new development and the changes to the existing landscape.  They remember how things have been in the past, and do not see all growth as a positive advancement. 

Others accept change, but want new development to recognize and respect existing land and development patterns.

Development is viewed as a “right”, but what are the “rights” of those who have already invested in the County, whether their land, their homes or existing businesses?

The County must respect and balance the “rights” of all: how can we find that balance?

Share this post! You could email it, bookmark it or digg it.

Comments

# re: Land Use, Change, and Development Rights , Posted by Alex on 8/13/2009 3:47 PM

The County has a tough job ahead of it in balance the "right" to develop land with the job of protecting the public good (in all its many forms)

From my read on things, the County does not have the right tools to balance these competing interests.

In the absence of having the right stuff, the ones with the loudest voice usually prevail; developers.

Come on' Rutherford County, lets get on the ball!

# re: Land Use, Change, and Development Rights , Posted by Eddy Tune on 8/25/2009 11:41 AM

Hi,
I operate a 270 acre cattle farm in the Florence area and during the last 5 years homes have been built next to the farm. During the last 2 years I have received complaints about the farm from the new neighbours. They do not like the smell, the animal noises and they dump debris over the fence onto the farm. They call the police department when a calf gets out instead of calling the landowner to get the calf back on the farm.

I can consider selling out to a developer, but if I do, I believe the neighbors will fight against the property being developed, but they do not like the farm either. I don't understand why people move out to the 'country' because of the rural setting, but complain about a farm and cattle that have been there for over 100 years.

Also, does anyone know the timeframe of the extension of the Vetarans Parkway Northwest loop that extends from Burnt Knob Road to Florence Road?

Thanks for your time.

# re: Land Use, Change, and Development Rights , Posted by Alex on 8/28/2009 4:03 PM

Planning is critically important to Rutherford County. We should all find ways to get involved!

# re: Land Use, Change, and Development Rights , Posted by Robert on 9/22/2009 11:33 PM

Its too late,.,., Land Use, Change, and Development Rights.,., This should have been done 30 years ago.I've been to M,boro city meetings and they are very irrogent people. They think the everday citizen is not worth listening too. They have their minds made up even before the meetings take place. They are like talking to a brick wall.,they answer to no one.

People have tried to talk to the city,explainng how we want M.boro to grow,smartly. We knew growth was coming,.,but we wanted planning,.,roads,infrastructure,and build around this. They devoped first,.,then came the roads and ibfrastructure,.,which is too late. Like I say its too late.,.,damage has been done.
We need turm limits on Goverment officials,.,they get to comfortable and answer to no one.

# re: Land Use, Change, and Development Rights , Posted by Georgia Buckner on 10/22/2009 5:50 PM

One thing that distresses me about the growth to our area (other than the traffic congestion) is the fact that develovpers and home builders have destroyed so many thousands of our old trees and woodlands. I know it may be easier for the builder/developers to just bulldoze the whole site and then re-landscape. However, relandscaping with short-lived trees like Bradford Pears and many other trees not native to this area is not the same.

I wish that developers that are developing subsdivisions would be required to leave a sizable green space, leaving native old trees and other growth for residents to enjoy, walk and jog, in and play and just for relaxing in nature.

I think builders/developers should leave at least some natural trees on all lots.



Add Comment

Title: *
Name: *
Email: (never displayed)
Website:
Comment: *  
Please add 3 and 4 and type the answer here: