TAKE ACTION to Protect Madison County Ridgetops

Let Madison County Commissioners know that our mountain ridges should remain pristine!

Responding to the desires of a single landowner, the Madison County Planning Board put aside the best interests of the wider community and recommended doing away with the rule that would prevent the construction of homes and buildings within 50 feet of ridgelines. This change would completely undercut Madison County’s Mountain Ridge Protection ordinance and open the door to unfettered home construction along the tops of our mountains.

Allowing development on our ridgetops would threaten our county’s irreplaceable natural beauty, environmental health, economic vitality, and the overall well-being of our community. The move by the Planning Board has sparked widespread public opposition.

Email Madison County Commissioners now and let them know you want them to protect our mountaintops!

Email Madison County Commissioners

We need you to take action today to let Madison County Commissioners know that we want them to vote to REJECT the Planning Board’s irresponsible recommendation. If you’ve emailed them already about this issue, we urge you to email them again to let them know we’re still watching.

Bad for Public Safety:
Allowing development on our ridgetops would directly increase the risks of natural disasters like landslides and wildfires, consequences we cannot afford. These disasters, fueled by deforestation and soil disturbance, pose a significant threat to the safety and security of our residents. It is imperative that we stand firm on this ordinance to safeguard our community’s lives and properties.

Bad for Our Economy:
Madison County’s mountains are more than just natural features; they are the backbone of our regional identity, drawing visitors, outdoor enthusiasts, and residents seeking a peaceful, scenic living environment. These mountains bolster our local economy and tax revenue by attracting tourism and promoting local businesses. Compromising on this ordinance would not only tarnish our community’s allure but also strike a blow to the economic heartbeat of our region. We cannot allow our mountain landscapes, a cornerstone of our heritage and economy, to be compromised.

Bad for Our Environment:
Preserving our mountain ridgetops is critical for broader environmental initiatives, including combating deforestation and protecting vital water sources. These areas play a crucial role in water filtration and biodiversity conservation. Upholding this ordinance is key to Madison County’s leadership in environmental stewardship and sustainability.

Email Madison County Commissioners now and let them know you want them to protect our mountaintops!

Email Madison County Commissioners

Background:
The county has received an application from a private citizen to amend the county’s Mountain Ridge Protection Ordinance and do away with a 50’ setback requirement, a key provision that protects mountain ridges from development.

In 1983, following the construction of the Sugar Top Resort in Avery County, the State of North Carolina passed a law protecting the mountain ridgelines of our state. Madison County then took the additional step of putting in place further safeguards to protect one of Madison County’s greatest assets: its natural beauty. One key rule that Madison County added was a 50’ setback on either side of a protected ridge. This simple rule makes protection of our ridgelines and enforcement of these rules relatively easy.

For 40 years, this ordinance has ensured that Madison County landowners, residents, and visitors would be blessed with visually stunning and natural mountain views and have the confidence that those views would be protected for future generations.

Now, a single landowner wants to do away with the setback requirements in order to develop on a ridgeline. This change in the law would affect ridgelines throughout the county, even though the applicant could simply seek a variance for their individual property.

Join us in opposing the proposed amendment to the Mountain Ridge Protection Ordinance. Learn more by checking out these resources:

Click here to read MountainTrue’s letter to the Planning Board.
Click here to read Clear Sky Madison’s letter to the Planning Board.
Read more about the proposal in this article from the Asheville Citizen-Times, published November 10.

Tell Madison County to Oppose Dangerous Industrial Biomass Facilities

The Madison County Planning Board is expected to vote on whether to recommend changes to the county’s land-use code that would allow dangerous, industrial biomass facilities in Madison County. The proposed amendments to the county’s land-use ordinance open the door to industrial-sized biomass facilities that would emit more climate-changing carbon into the atmosphere, cause significant air pollution, and pose serious fire risks to nearby residents.

Take Action: Email the Planning Board and County Commissioners and let them know you want a clean and safe Madison County.

BACKGROUND:

In response to public feedback, the board has significantly revised the definition of what constitutes a large biomass facility, requires they obtain a special permit, and restricts their operations to industrial-zoned areas of the county. Here are the latest revisions to the definition of a “large biomass facility”:

“A facility that converts biomass sources into value-added products energy for public or private use. Biomass includes but is not limited to wood and wood processing waste, wood pellets, agricultural crops and waste materials, biogenic materials in municipal solid waste, animal manure, and human sewage.”

Large Biomass Facility:

Annual Biomass Throughput: A large biomass facility processes over 5,000 metric tons of biomass per year.
Energy Production: A large biomass facility generates over 10,000 MWh or more energy annually.
Number of Employees: A large biomass facility has over 50 employees
Capital Investment Threshold: A large biomass facility requires an investment of over $5 million.

This broad definition raises three key concerns:

Inconsistencies in Regulation: The definition of “large biomass facility” appears to include activities already separately defined and regulated within the ordinance, such as sawmills and certain manufacturing facilities. This inconsistency in regulation creates confusion for residents, business owners, and the County in determining which set of rules applies to specific activities.
Potential for Unintended Consequences: An overly broad definition could inadvertently allow certain activities, such as a sawmill evolving into a wood pellet production facility, to escape more stringent permitting requirements. This could occur because nonconforming land uses (i.e., land uses that pre-date an ordinance amendment that makes them newly “nonconforming”) are typically allowed to continue as long as they do not change their primary use or expand significantly. Therefore, a clearer definition is needed to prevent such loopholes.
Unfair Scope: The proposal’s distinction between “large” and “small” biomass facilities does not serve the public or the ordinance’s purposes. It would both allow industrial-scale facilities in residential areas while punishing truly “small” biomass land uses—especially under the currently overbroad definition of “biomass”—by requiring regular folks to go through an expensive and time-consuming set of rezoning and permitting processes. The ordinance should focus on making sure industrial biomass facilities are properly located without sweeping up landowners looking to make occasional, harmless use of collected waste materials. Failing to make this distinction may lead to unnecessary hostility towards environmental advocacy and regulation.

A More Refined Definition

To address these concerns and create a more precise and effective regulatory framework, we propose a more tailored definition of “large biomass facility.” Our suggested definition would:

Apply only to facilities that produce biomass products for specific off-site uses, such as electricity generation, heating, or transportation fuel.
Tailor the amendment so that if the facility combusts biomass on site, the definition applies only if any electricity generated is transmitted for off-site use.
Include wood pellet biomass facilities explicitly within the definition to ensure they are adequately regulated.
Maintain the broad definition of “biomass” while narrowing the scope of facilities that fall under this definition.

Additional Considerations

In addition to refining the definition of “large biomass facility” to help distinguish between different types of biomass-related activities, we support:

Requiring special use permits for biomass facilities,
Correcting what may have been a mistake in section 8.11.12 (“Noise”) that regulates facilities that generate noise pollution “up to 70 decibels.” We believe the county meant “more than 70 decibels.

Call on the DEQ and Henderson County to restore and protect the health of Clear Creek

The NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is currently accepting public comments on Draft NPDES Permit No. NC0090247 — which would violate the Clean Water Act by allowing Henderson County to construct a new wastewater treatment plant in Edneyville that could discharge up to 200,000 gallons of wastewater per day into a stream that is already listed as impaired and significantly impacted by pollution.

Henderson County needs to clean up Clear Creek, not make it more polluted.

For decades, the aquatic habitat of Clear Creek has been impacted by pollution from human and livestock waste, fertilizers, and sediment. Discharge from a new Wastewater Treatment Plant would only worsen the pollution problem. Several studies have shown that effluent from wastewater treatment plants contains toxins that can adversely affect aquatic life. Therefore, additional discharge from a new wastewater treatment plant could further degrade Clear Creek.

The Clean Water Act prohibits North Carolina from issuing an NPDES permit that would authorize a new discharge into a stream that is already impaired without first preparing an analysis showing that the discharge will not further impair water quality. North Carolina also requires that the County pursue “the most environmentally sound alternative [to be] selected from the reasonably cost-effective options” [15A N.C. Admin. Code 2H.0105(c)(2)]. In the case of Edneyville, the alternative of connecting to Hendersonville’s existing sewer system and wastewater treatment plant is more environmentally sound and reasonably cost-effective — it will also prevent a new discharge into an already impaired stream.

DEQ must uphold the Clean Water Act by denying a permit that would allow the County to further pollute an already impaired waterway. Instead, Henderson County should work with the City of Hendersonville to connect Edneyville to the City’s existing sewer lines and wastewater treatment plant. Additionally, Henderson County should adopt a Comprehensive Plan that discourages sprawl and protects the rural character and water quality of Edneyville and other county communities.

Take Action to Protect Old-Growth and Mature Forests in Nantahala-Pisgah National Forests

The U.S. Forest Service has announced a plan to amend all 128 forest management plans nationwide — including the plan for the Pisgah-Nantahala National Forests — in accordance with President Biden’s Executive Order directing his administration to conserve old-growth forests.

This is a critical opportunity to fix some of the issues with the deeply flawed Pisgah-Nantahala management plan that placed 100,000 acres of old-growth forests, natural heritage areas, roadless areas, and sensitive habitats in zones that are open to commercial logging. You can take action in two ways:

Sign our petition calling on the Forest Service to amend the Nantahala Pisgah National Forests management plan to protect our old-growth forests.
(Deadline: Feb. 2, 9 AM)
Submit your own unique public comment through the Forest Service portal.
(Deadline: Feb. 2, 11:59 PM)

Old-growth forests store large amounts of carbon, clean the air we breathe, maintain and increase biodiversity, filter water, and reduce wildfire risks. The old-growth forests of the Nantahala-Pisgah National Forests are home to several endangered and threatened species, including four species of endangered bats and the imperiled Blue Ridge lineage of green salamanders.

The amendments proposed by the Forest Service should create standards for the protection of all old-growth forests on National Forest Lands. It’s important that the new rule is strong enough to protect the rich biodiversity of our region and to keep these massive carbon stores firmly rooted in the soil to mitigate climate change and flexible enough to allow for the restoration of old-growth stand structure and wildfire resilience.

Thank you for your commitment to resilient forests. Please take action today.

ACTION: Support Road Safety in Downtown Asheville

Let the City of Asheville know that you support making College Street and Patton Avenue safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders.

Take Action to Support Complete Streets for Asheville

The City of Asheville is wavering in its commitment to complete streets and needs your support for the College/Patton project today. MountainTrue has long been a supporter of complete street projects that make moving through our communities safer, easier, and more environmentally sustainable. Our new program Neighbors for More Neighbors WNC also supports such projects as a way to mitigate congestion in our city centers as we make room for more residents there. City staff and traffic engineers have studied this project and responded to community concerns along the way. They have improved the design, consulted with emergency responders, and compared vehicular traffic patterns to other streets in town to demonstrate that this new design would not create the congestion that some opponents of this project fear. Their expert analysis and process have built upon multiple studies and plans that have recommended projects like this one since the 2009 Downtown Master Plan. However, our city’s leadership needs to hear from more voices that support turning College Street and Patton Avenues into complete streets with buffered bike lanes and high-visibility crosswalks. Take action today to encourage Asheville City Council to vote in support of the College/Patton project and make our downtown safer for all users.

Take Action

Neighbors for More Neighbors WNC advocates for more attainable housing that is built in places and at a scale that most benefits the health of our natural environment. We support attainable housing in and near our city centers because that is an efficient use of infrastructure, it decreases our overall carbon footprint, and also because we want our downtowns to be vibrant, thriving, inclusive places that all people in our community both can and want to access and enjoy. We believe that investments in infrastructure that make downtowns more pedestrian friendly, rather than vehicle oriented, pay off by activating our city center in a personal way and on a human scale. Bike lanes are a part of that landscape not just because they benefit bicyclists, but also because the less car-centric we make our downtown, the more people-centered it becomes. Complete street projects enable vehicle access and safer options for other road users, and, ultimately, we believe that complete streets in our city center will benefit businesses by making downtown a place that residents will want to spend more time and money in.

Join us in supporting complete street investments in downtown Asheville by supporting the College/Patton Project today. Click here to read our letter of support for the College Street and Patton Avenue Redesign Project.

ACTION: Tell NCDEQ to Deny the Draft Clear Creek Wastewater Permit & Stop Additional Pollution of Local Waterways

The NC Department of Environmental Quality is accepting comments on the Draft Permit for the Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Project (NPDES Permit NCO090247). We invite you to join our opposition to this draft permit.

Strong wastewater infrastructure can effectively improve water quality, but unfortunately, the approach taken by Henderson County misses the mark. If DEQ issues this permit, it will result in construction of a new unnecessary wastewater treatment plant in a rural area of the county and a discharge into Clear Creek, which is already listed as impaired on the state’s 303(d) list of impaired streams. A new source of pollution is cause for concern, and issuing this permit would violate the Clean Water Act.

Additionally, there is a more environmentally sound and reasonably cost-effective treatment option available — connecting to the existing sewer system operated by the City of Hendersonville — and the County has not accounted for the costs of operating and maintaining a new wastewater treatment plant for years to come.

But any action on sewer expansion would be irresponsible without a strong plan to address future development. The county is still contemplating its 2045 Comprehensive Plan, which will guide the future for growth and development in the county, and appropriate land use protections need to be implemented before facilitating unchecked development.

We need you to tell NCDEQ to deny this permit. Take action below.