Thank you for reading the MtDemocrat.com digital edition. In order to continue reading this story please choose one of the following options.
If you are a current subscriber and wish to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com, please select the Subscriber Verification option below. If you already have a login, please select "Login" at the lower right corner of this box.
Special Introductory Offer
For a short time we will be offering a discount to those who call us in order to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your print subscription. Our customer support team will be standing by Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm to assist you.
If you are not a current subscriber and wish not to take advantage of our special introductory offer, please select the $12 monthly option below to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your online subscription
I spent Tuesday evening at the library listening to a few folks willing to run for office. It was exceptionally interesting and informative, but you had to listen to what was actually being said. “High density-low income,” spoken as if it is one word. I hear this phrase quite often since I’ve been a Realtor for 34 years.
How about “high density-high income” as in high-rise condos up to four or five floors, with a view of the High Sierra? One well-designed quality complex with pools and great landscaping, upscale, no work. Super quality with high rents all on a few acres would bring in many folks with money to spend, culture to share and time to be involved in county volunteerism. Taxes would be high, money would flow and these inhabitants could sit and view the most beautiful scenery around or partake of the wonderful trails and recreational activities, or shop or volunteer. In conjunction low density-low income could offer one acre parcels (that is 208′ x 208′), 1200 to 1800 square foot homes where inhabitants could grow their own garden and maintain their own park (backyard). This would instill a work ethic and a sense of community. Older folks are prohibited from maintaining large yards simply due to our age. Our younger folks have energy to burn and have trouble finding jobs that pay enough for groceries. They can grow their own.
At this point in time 5 acre parcels aren’t selling as rapidly as they used to because they are expensive and when combined with the TIM fees and permit fees, even a small home gets out of reach. Divide the cost of a 5 acre parcel by 5 (seller still gets what he was asking), add the cost of a nice wide road and the cost is still within reason. County streamlines the demands on fees and reduces non-safety requirements. Infrastructure is always a major concern, but there are many parcels within partially built up areas that could become useful if everyone looked at things more creatively.
I’m sure there are a million arguments why this won’t work. In causing folks to think it through, there might be a better idea that will jump out of the box. Personally though, I have my 34 acres and I will stay here until I shrivel up and the wind blows my dust away, unless the government thinks differently and I’m moved to a high-rise health facility with a beautiful view of the High Sierra.