Reader comments
A reversal in Mapleton
10 comments | Read story
Get today's headlines via email
Afternoon edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In News
Across Site
- Las Vegas revises request for rights...
- Prepare so an earthquake doesn't...
- Is technology making us stupid?
- Crews searching recycling center in...
- West Valley City leaders to join call...
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- Woman charged in Rasmussen death...
- Photos: Salt Lake Main Library...
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Amendments to gutted sex education...
In News
Across Site
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- Crews searching recycling center in...
- Despite data, Lyme disease sufferers...
- View live stream of services for...
- LDS bishop ordered to stand trial for...
- Father-in-law dragged deeper into...
- Battling misconceptions: Faced with...
- Josh Powell had 'incestuous' images...
- Focus returns to Powell children today
In News
Across Site
- Gay rights and religious liberty
93 - Families at odds over Powell's actions
54 - LDS bishop ordered to stand trial
41 - Utah House blocks Sandstrom bill
39 - Powell call:'I'm afraid for their lives'
33 - Photos: Year of the Dragon
26 - Bill would cut auto safety checks
24 - Should SLC bid again for Olympics?
23 - Utah takes $171M in settlement
19 - Powell told son he had 'surprise'
18







I hate it when a property owner tears up his mountains so we have to look at it. We have enjoyed his mountains for so long! We don't want to buy it, we just want him to leave it alone so we can enjoy it.
Have you actually seen the property that Gibby wants to develop? The article prints the address--I would suggest you go by and actually look at it. It would be utter insanity for the city to allow his proposed development. The homes would slide right off the mountain side. Then, the owners would sue the city of Mapleton for "allowing" them to build on land that was never meant for development.
You seem to think that owners of private property are free from any kind of reasonable and practical rules and regulations. You are mistaken.
This little feud between a stubborn property owner, a stuborn city counsel, and a stubborn citizen's group has garnered WAY too much ink. Please, DNews.. save your paper space for real news and spare us the village drama. Nobody cares.
"Someone" in Mapleton who apparently isn't attracted to cliff dwelling wants to exercise unrighteous dominion on others who seem to need the cliff view, or in this case the view from the hill.
So, are the motives of Mr. L and the other "someones" driven by concern for the view FROM the hill or the view OF the hill?
Those who choose to live on the hill can worry about landslides. They don't need this unsolicited assistance.
If its a view you want, go buy one. Or better yet, buy this one, at fair market value. Oh, so you want someone else to make that sacrifice for you?
"Someone" in Mapleton who apparently isn't attracted to cliff dwelling wants to exercise unrighteous dominion on others who seem to need the cliff view, or in this case the view from the hill.
So, are the motives of Mr. L and the other "someones" driven by concern for the view FROM the hill or the view OF the hill?
Those who choose to live on the hill can worry about landslides. They don't need this unsolicited assistance.
If its a view you want, go buy one. Or better yet, buy this one, at fair market value. Oh, so you want someone else to make that sacrifice for you? No, no!
I will keep raising my crops in Mapleton regardless and simply hope that we can have the right to try to prevent any more lawyers from suing us in the future.