20080880 Ver 1_Public Comments_20080808 (3)

FW: Cliffs Letter
Subject: FW: Cliffs Letter
From: "ScribeNC" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 12:06:35 -0400
To: "'ScribeNC"' <[e-mail]>
Please find attached a copy of my letter to USACE regarding the Cliffs - High Carolina project.
Stephen Wilson
Fairview
828-606-0241
stephen's letter.pdf Content-Type: application/pdf
Content-Encoding: base64
I of 1 8/8/2008 12:06 PM
6 August 2008
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Attn: Ms. Lori Beckwith
151 Patton Ave. Room 208
Asheville NC, 28801
RE: Public Hearing Request - The Cliff's of High Carolina (development); Corps Action ID #
200701619
Cc: D.J. Gerken, Southern Environmental Law Center; Buncombe County Board of Supervisors;
Cindi Karoly, NC-DWQ; others
Ms Beckwith:
The purpose of this correspondence is to request the USACE call and hold a public hearing at
such a time and place so to hear the concerned voices of the citizens that will be, or may be
impacted by the above captioned planned development.
Make no mistake: it is not my intention to stop this development. In fact, it is my wish the
development proceed with all due haste, but proceed in a manner that is responsible and
portends the best outcome for the existing citizens who will surely be impacted by the
development. There are many issues requiring review. Some of these are economic to be
sure, but many are plainly quality of life issues beyond the scope of the USACE.
I will not tell you what you already know. I will not regurgitate the information in the public
domain surrounding the development and golf course except to remind you of this one simple
fact. We do not suckle the water bearing breast of Asheville, nor do we choose to do so. All of
the homes and family farms, within the downstream onslaught of this development are
dependent on wells and groundwater without which they become less than worthless. To
have a prize is one thing, but to have a prize taken away for the sole enjoyment of a few is
entirely another. Our ground water resources are at critical levels. It seems reasonable for us
to expect our limited water supply not be diminished in quantity, or quantity.
Developer Obfuscation
It is, of course, to the development's best interest to cloud the issues. They have an enormous
economic investment. Consider the following quote from one of the developer's paid
surrogates:
"...It is not anticipated that this project will result in additional impacts on the property
surrounding this project. The majority of the adjoining property is existing residential
development. On the southern half of the project the Fairview side there are two large
tracts owned by land companies who have no interest in selling their property. The
northern half of the project the Swannanoa side borders 140 and the town of
Swannanoa. Swannanoa is a fully self sustaining town with ample businesses and
amenities to support the local population as well as absorb the proposed
development High Carolina will be a primarily second home development. As such the
residents will not require the municipal services such as schools necessitated by
permanent residents Nor will it necessitate the amount of adjacent services that a
permanent resident population would.
Asheville is also within minutes of the property and will serve the project for both
shopping and recreation ..."
Thank you for your help with this project
Best regards
Jennifer L Robertson.
Excuse me, but it's bizarre, even ludicrous to say what the impact of the development will or
will not be until the development is completed and the properties sold.
The developer has no way of knowing whether the homes he sells will be primary or
secondary residences. He has no way of knowing if the purchasers will have children of school
age or not. Even if the developer were to attempt such, if his ultimate profit lay in first homes
with school age children, rest assured, that is the demographic that will prevail. The only sure
thing is that our, the current residents' property taxes will go into orbit. This is not a bad thing
as long as we are able to sell our properties at a substantial profit or at de minimis, a
reasonable profit and move on. Such is the American way.
With these kinds of comments in evidence by the developer (surrogates), it is only prudent to
suspect everything emanating from the developer's direction. Therefore, prudence dictates a
measure of protection or the ability for redress is required. Realizing it is not in the purview of
the USACE to require or even comment on such, I would still like to make the following
suggestion.
The developer is required to post and maintain at the development's expense a bond in such
an amount to make the community whole in case of loss either individually, or as a group.
That bond should be no less than $500 million, perhaps more. How does one come to such a
number?
Dry Wells
Now that the development has started the process of securing their infrastructure needs by
blasting, there is evidence that the fragile rock matrix has fractured, thus causing wells on
adjoining Alpine Mountain to go dry in an inordinately short amount of time. It then follows
that there may have been a fault artificially created. Remember too, WNC is an active fault
zone. The fissures, either natural or manmade, can travel horizontally a great distance and
affect the porosity and effective permeability in dramatic ways ... damaging ways. It appears
a cone effect has already begun. As this is a non-hydrocarbon producing area, there has been
no subsurface mapping, i.e., no structure, structural shape, porosity top and base, fault
surface, unconformity, interval isopach, facies, ever prepared. There is no datum from which
to draw these maps. There has not been any geophysical (seismic) or test well research of any
significance performed. None of the stakeholders, the USACE, citizens affected, nor developer
knows what the local stratigraphic succession or hydrology truly entails. By illustration, please
review this USGS diagram:
RECHARGE AREA
DISCHARGE AREA
It is easy to understand how fresh water resources can be adversely affected when fracturing
occurs. I fear ongoing infrastructure work and uncontrolled (for profit) water use by the
development will cone our drought stricken resources out of existence, thus rendering our
home and farms uninhabitable and equally depressing of no or little resale value.
Again, a bond paid for and maintained by the development makes simple sense as does a
complete hydrological study financed by the development. This study should include, but not
be limited to test wells to a depth suitable to construct such data, and a baseline study of all
private wells within a two or three mile radius from the development. Why so far? I refer you
back to the above paragraphs.
Drought
Western North Carolina (WNC) is in the strangle hold of, what those who know and
understand such things, an extreme drought. Yes droughts of the past have come and they
have gone as will this one, but they will return. It seems senseless to burden the limited supply
of available subsurface water resources so a select few can chase a little white ball around a
well manicured pasture. As I write this letter our neighbors in Hendersonville face an imposed
and mandatory set of water usage restrictions. Further, our French Broad River is at a 114 year
low level. I do not apologize for these concerns.
As a point of reference, the state of NJ took several golf courses to court and heavily fined
them during their recent drought.
So how severe is the drought in Western North Carolina? NOAA's Drought Monitor and the
North Carolina Drought Management Advisory Council as of 29 July 2008 classified drought
conditions in WNC as D4, Extreme Drought.
Drougm Classifications
DO - =,bnormally Diy
DI - Moderate Drought
D-'- Severe Drouglt
M - Extreme Drought
N - Excel:rtional Drouglxt
Map: North Carolina Drought Management Advisory Council
The council goes on to discuss and recommend guidelines to best use our valuable resource
and guess what, maintaining a golf course used by a few at the detriment of many is not on
that list. I invite you to visit the council's informative website at: http://www.ncdrought.org/.
Of course, this begs the question: How much water does a golf course use? Let me answer this
with two startling findings.
According to the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America, on average, golf courses
in the United States use 300,000 gallons of water per day. - Department of Agricultural and
Resource Economics, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1172
"The development of golf courses usually entails land clearing and filling causing
erosion and blocking the soil's ability to retain water efficiently. In addition, golf course
maintenance can deplete fresh water resources typically requiring about 3,000 cubic
meters of water per day, which is enough to meet the needs of 15,000 people." - UN
Atlas of the Oceans
... can deplete fresh water resources typically requiring about 3,000 cubic meters of water
per day, which is enough to meet the needs of 15,000 people. That's a lot of water!
I realize the development has grandiose, eco-friendly plans around how they are going to
recycle water for their project, but their plan doesn't pass the common sense test.
Let's consider this as a matter of scale. According to WorldWatch (worldwatch.org) we find:
Amount of water it would take, per day, to support 4.7 billion people at the UN
2.5 billion gallons
daily minimum
Amount of water used, per day, to irrigate the world's golf courses 2.5 billion gallons
Amount of water used by 60,000 villagers in Thailand, on average, per day 6,500 cubic meters
Amount of water used by one golf course in Thailand, on average, per day 6,500 cubic meters
Current area of the wetlands of the Colorado River Delta, which now receives just 150,000 acres
0.1 percent of the river water that once flowed through it
Area that could be covered to a depth of 2 feet with water drawn from the
Colorado River by the city of Las Vegas, which uses much of that allotment to 150,000 acres
water its more than 60 golf courses
Pollution associated with golf courses
Albeit where most of my concern lay, water quantity is a single issue. What about the
downstream pollution aspects? What lies in store for those families and family farms who will
be plagued by sediment and pesticides in their water source? In fact, there are already reports
about sediment filled streams which emanate from the development property on both
Swannanoa and Fairview sides. Again citing the two previous sources:
"Pollution from the large quantities of pesticides, fertilizers and herbicides (about 1500
kg a year) required to maintain golf courses can lead to habitat degradation, and can
cause health problems. In both the Sarasota Bay and the Corpus Christy National
Estuary Program assessments, lawn care practices on golf courses were found to be
major sources of nitrate and phosphate contamination of the bay from storm water
runoff. Exacerbating their impacts is the fact that golf resorts are more and more often
situated in or near protected areas or areas where resources are limited." - UN Atlas of
the Oceans
Further, WorldWatch tells us:
Average amount of pesticides used per acre, per year, on golf courses 18.0 pounds
Average amount of pesticides used, per acre, per year, in agriculture 2.7 pounds
Many, dare I say most of these pollutants have a negative effect on the flora and fauna with
which they come into direct contact. History, and at least one movie, shows us countless past
episodes where downstream pollutants have been found to be responsible for birth defects,
cancer, and other diseases in humans and wildlife. In fact the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) created a bottomless pit of money (Superfund) to handle dire situations. Two of
these Superfund sites are actually at the development's door step in Swannanoa, and let me
remind you of the debacle we remember as Love Canal.
Briefly, let me bring up the fact that trout have been found in the streams this development is
asking to impact. I do not have such expertise as required to discuss this issue, but others do
and will. Agreed, I care little about the game of golf, but I do fish. The thought that the entire
French Broad River watershed will be negatively impacted if the pollution caused by the
construction of, and further maintenance of the development's proposed golf course concerns
me.
In summary, this development stands to destroy the livelihoods and in some cases lives of all
those downstream and/or sharing the local water source with it. Those responsible for the
development stand to make a substantial profit from it. Were it up to me to weigh the balance
of the two, I know what I would do, but alas, it is not. I ask only that the Army Corps of
Engineers withhold granting permission to the Cliffs development until it guarantees the value
of our homes will not be diminished and our health not be jeopardized as they move forward.
Again, I want this development to move forward, but in an environmentally responsible way,
and in a way that solidly demonstrates a commitment to the well being of its current
neighbors. If you will grant the citizens of Fairview the opportunity to sit with you and discuss
these matters at length, we will gladly share our ideas.
If you require further or complete attribution for anything that goes before, I'll be happy to
provide it.

Stephen Wilson
1483 Old Fort Rd.
Fairview, NC 28730
828-606-0241