[MA-RPC] FW: [at-l] 250 senior living homes

Sat Feb 25 09:21:10 EST 2006

There is an advantage to not making the trail too wide and flat.  If  
we make a section handy cap assessable then you will have bikes and  
aTVs on it.

Again, I say that we need to get together with people like the farm  
land trust to provide a lower level of protection of the land next to  
the NPS corridor.
We needd to do this before a developer shows up wanting to develop  
the land.

On Feb 25, 2006, at 9:01 AM, Hal Wright wrote:

> Start my 2 cents.
>
> In general, local municipalities understand the $600K rule, which  
> is why you will often see great sprawling developments of 1/2 to 1  
> acre lots with McMansions on them (in lieu of more affordable  
> single homes on smaller lots), coupled with some townhouses at the  
> opposite extreme, where the density of housing cuts infrastructure  
> costs (albeit not school costs). Municipalities love high-end  
> senior-citizen townhouse developments: no kids going to school;  
> high-density, high-value homes.
>
> What you don't see is small, affordable single homes on smaller  
> lots, as these represent the worst financial situation for the  
> municipality: lots of infrastructure, lots of roads, more school  
> students, lower home value and hence lower tax revenue. Hence the  
> rising cost of such homes that already exist, and the housing  
> squeeze for low- to mid- income individuals and families.
>
> From the AT point of view, we should be cautious about trumpeting  
> the "it takes a $600K house to break even" rule of thumb, as we  
> might end up getting what we wish for, and having huge McMansion- 
> style developments on what used to be farm land littering our  
> viewsheds.
>
> I hate this whole situation, and I know I'll get flamed again for  
> saying it, but Michelle's response is what I was describing earlier  
> when I discussed the reality that the AT in the mid-Atlantic is  
> rapidly becoming a suburban trail. Here is an ATC employee saying,  
> if I understand you correctly Michelle, that the outcome here isn't  
> too bad because we'll have a buffer bigger than the minimum  
> corridor width between us and the development. I salute the  
> pragmatism inherent in that statement, but I also acknowledge the  
> reality that it describes.
>
>  I didn't mean to say before, and don't mean to say now, that we  
> will be looking into people's back yards over the whole length of  
> the trail (although some sections have that appearance now, and  
> more will in the future). Rather, I'm saying that we will be  
> caretakers of a long, thin sliver of a park slicing through the  
> suburbs, with our beloved AT at its center. Such a place will not  
> have the wilderness feel some of us are accustomed to and quite  
> fond of. Such a place demands different things of its caretakers  
> than a wilderness park: active curtailment of noise pollution, more  
> active treadway maintenance, better enforcement, more stringent  
> rules on campsite and shelter use, and so on.
>
> If, like me, you live in an area where there are large wooded parks  
> in a suburban setting, you know that the official response has been  
> to pave pathways through those woods so that they may be patrolled  
> by rangers in SUVs. Clearly this isn't the approach we are looking  
> for.
>
> The DWG area, Jersey side, is patrolled by federal park rangers on  
> ATVs. They go up the Douglas trail to Backpacker Site 2, and then  
> on to Sunfish Pond along the AT itself. How do we feel about that?
>
> Our club has already been discussing the enforcement issue in  
> monthly meetings, and many advocate a sign-up arrangement wherein  
> two club members will be stationed at trouble spots throughout the  
> warmer months. Others have expressed concern that these people will  
> be putting themselves at risk. And, sad to say, trouble isn't  
> confined to the warmer months. My sense is that, acting alone, the  
> clubs will not be able to manage this problem for the long term.  
> What's needed is a creative, overarching solution that gets willing  
> and able enforcement where it's required, without asphalt and  
> without (or with minimal use of) ATVs. A more robust , four-season  
> ridgerunner program is but one piece of the overall solution.
>
> End my 2 cents.
>
>
>
> On Feb 24, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Walt Daniels wrote:
>
>>  I am sure there is a formula but I don't know what it is. I will  
>> ask the
>> next time I see someone who might know. I think it is the fairly  
>> obvious,
>> add up the costs of schools, polices, roads, etc. and compare with  
>> the taxes
>> they pay.
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Michele Miller [mailto:mmiller at atconf.org]
>>> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 10:03 AM
>>> To: 'Walt Daniels'; 'MARPC list'
>>> Subject: RE: [MA-RPC] FW: [at-l] 250 senior living homes
>>>
>>> Walt--How did your town determine that any home under $600K
>>> is a net loss?
>>> Did they have some specific formula that could be passed on
>>> to other townships?
>>>
>>> This particular development may turn out to be somewhat of a
>>> win-win situation.  The 14-acre open area directly adjacent
>>> to the A.T. will remain "open" in perpetuity effectively
>>> increasing our buffer from adjacent development.  If this
>>> goes through as proposed, it will be a much better situation
>>> than having homes right up against the corridor.
>>>
>>> Michele
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ma-rpc-bounces at commerce-02.cilia.org
>>> [mailto:ma-rpc-bounces at commerce-02.cilia.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Walt Daniels
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:43 PM
>>> To: MARPC list
>>> Subject: [MA-RPC] FW: [at-l] 250 senior living homes
>>>
>>>  Another article about one of the current theats. The
>>> township just doesn't seem to understand the true cost of any
>>> development compared with the cost of open space. In my area,
>>> any house under $600K is a net loss to the town for services  
>>> required.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: at-l-bounces at backcountry.net
>>> [mailto:at-l-bounces at backcountry.net] On Behalf Of Steve Landis
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:29 PM
>>> To: AT-L
>>> Subject: [at-l] 250 senior living homes
>>>
>>> http://www.cumberlink.com/articles/2006/02/21/news/news21.txt
>>>
>>> "The area abuts the Appalachian Trail, which runs through
>>> South Middleton.
>>> Faley says he's even heard talk of using that area in
>>> conjunction with the existing space for the 2,175-mile trail
>>> from Maine to Georgia." ???????
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AT-L Mailing List.
>>>
>>> Go here to unsubscribe or change your options:
>>>
>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MA-RPC mailing list
>>> MA-RPC at commerce-02.cilia.org
>>> http://www.nynjtc.org/mailman/listinfo/ma-rpc
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MA-RPC mailing list
>> MA-RPC at commerce-02.cilia.org
>> http://www.nynjtc.org/mailman/listinfo/ma-rpc
>
> _______________________________________________
> MA-RPC mailing list
> MA-RPC at commerce-02.cilia.org
> http://www.nynjtc.org/mailman/listinfo/ma-rpc