Which is more important: protecting urban forests or building houses? In 10-20 years, if the environment is severely damaged or destroyed, it won't matter where we live because we'll be either very sick from pollution, carbon emissions, and impure air and water, or we'll be dead.

Will Fayetteville be remembered for protecting the environment or for destroying it to build houses and hotels? Which Fayetteville would make us feel most proud or would we rather live in?

I wish the City Council could see that keeping the current zoning for Markham Hill, no matter the developer, saves most of the urban forest, prevents the most pollution, prevents traffic and flooding and sewage problems, saves the most historic and Native American sites, and also gives the developer the opportunity to develop in the existing RSF-4 area on the west side of the mountain.

The developer bought the land as is: (1) 72-acre PZD promised by a previous City Council where no development is allowed and no more commercialization than the Pratt Inn and Event Barn is allowed, and (2) 72-acre RSF-4 where 30% tree cover must remain and the land can be developed with a max of 4 houses per acre.

Are 230 additional homes worth the destruction of 100 acres of Markham Hill that a rezoning would accomplish? That's the approximate difference between the rezoning (520 homes or living units) and the existing zoning (288 homes).

The best compromise between total preservation and total destruction of Markham Hill is the current zoning. The neighborhood has what is most compatible and appropriate and the developer has exactly what they bought.