Comments about ‘Landowner in an uphill battle’

Classic case of not in my back yard. He owns the land let him do what he'd like. For those that don't want the consruction then move. How do you think your homes go there? Pot calling the kettle black.

If they don't want him to build there then buy it from him instead of trying to steal the man's land by destroying it's value. If you are so in love with undeveloped land and truly "friends" of the mountain bulldoze your own home under!

Classic case all right -- of an arrogant man that has no regard for his community or the beauty of Maple Mountain -- which he has wantonly defaced. This land should have never been sold to a private citizen in the first place, but it was a dark day for Mapleton and anyone who loves Maple Mountain when Mr. Gibby acquired it and started mutilating everything in sight with his bulldozers, backhoes,lawyers and complicit cronies in high places.

How on earth can the D-News get away with writing an article about some "innocent landowner" without disclosing all of Gibby's high-powered legislative connections and the influence those buddies have sought to use on his behalf. Do we remember Buttars? Speaker Curtis? They attended this man's hearings just to be there and show who had his back.

This article reads like the city is just being a bully and won't let him use his own land. But this dude is a classic jerk who is using money and influence to get his way. How can you publish this stuff???

Chris Buttars took it upon himself to write a threatening letter to the court on legislative letterhead regarding this.

Des News, July 5, 2008 “Buttars used 'black baby' remark again, officials say”

This whole thing stinks.

Who sold him this land? If the skyline trail runs along the property then it must be a leased land deal. It should belong to the BLM as it is a major watershed for the area below it. Building on this property will only create more land slides and loss of homes to those that build on it. This is a classical case of greed and developing where it shouldn't be developed.

Having or owning land does not give a person the right to develop it if it puts others in harms way, including prospective home buyers. The USGS should be involved to protect what little water shed is left and put more restrictions on its use. The west side of the valley is suffering the fate of poor development and the homeowners are the ones losing their land.

Developing must follow what is best for all people, including outside his property, so it doesn't endanger others. He is not the only person who has interest in how this land is developed. That's why we have zoning and development laws, to protect existing and other peoples property too.

this is the guy who is buddies with all the ultra conservatives ... especially Chris Buttars. Remember how Buttars got slapped on the hand for pressuring a judge in this dude's ongoing court saga?

Don't feed in to this guy. If he wants to develop something, he should start with his conscience.

Stop building on the mountains. Good grief, are we so materialistic that we are willing to despoil one of Utah's greatest assets?

sorry but if he owns the land then he should be able to do with it as he wishes. As long as he doesn't put up bill boards adult book stores then have at it. It might have been better to keep it as a park but some where some one sold it and that is legal. The concerned home owners should have checked into the land before they built. It is sort of like People building in the flight plan of an airport and then complaining about the noise. Check first. These home owners did do their home work. SORRY, get used to your new nieghobors.

He doesn't make enough as a Dr.? It's people like him who caused the economic & medical problems we are delaing with right now.

I'm curious, who was there first? Did Gibby own the land before the homes in this "luxury community" were there or were the "luxury community homes there before Gibby owned the land?

So Utah County is in the news again....

Gibby,

Do yourself a favor and start acting better. It makes no sense to be a loser to a few hikers trying to walk by an empty development.

Get the chip off your shoulder bro. Lighten up. Who is going to want to buy a lot in there in a decade if all you have done is soured the place up.

We are all in this valley together. Just because you have a little money doesn't mean we want to watch your circus.
If you had all the money in the world to buy up all the clean water and pour it into the sea just because you could doesn't mean we would let you do it. These mountains and trails are pretty much the same thing.

Tread lightly and make some friends.
Kinda seems like common sense doesn't it?

Sounds like the communists are taking over America. There are condemnation laws and open space funds to buy private property. We must protect property rights as vigorously as we protect freedom of speech. The majority can take the Gibby land but we must be willing to pay for it. Denying an owner the use of his property through zoning and politics is the highest form of Covetous behavior. This type of anger is not worthy of the greatest country in the world. We do not confiscate property because someone accumulated too much.

Take a tip from St George, if you don't want homes on the hillside, push the city government for a hillside ordinance like the one St. George has. The townhomes that got placed on the 'D' hill left a scar that polarized the community into action and pushed the City to enact our hillside ordinance. Can't remove the junk from the hills once they are there Mapleton!!

It's greed vs. not in my back yard. Can there be a winner? Gibby seems less sensitive than Bernie Madoff.

Friends of Maple Mountain = someone who has destroyed someone else's view of the mountain but doesn't want their view destroyed.

Maybe they can enlist Robert Redford to their cause.

... means it WILL happen. Always does.

Money trumps principal, so the man has the right to do as he pleases. If you don't like it then go get your own money and buy your own mountain, congressman, or what ever you want. This is America, land for the taking and freedom for the rich.

the photo accompanying this article says his property is "at the base of Maple Mountain". That horrid scar he dug up the unblemished flank of the mountain is not at the base, it is ON the mountain, and it is an act of vandalism. That mountain is a symbol of pristine beauty and a touchstone to all who have lived in it's shadow for generations. What a selfish and despicable act: that a man would have the hubris to bankrupt a small community, defy court decisions, and proceed to cut a gash into that beautiful and beloved landmark. He should be ashamed. And whoever "sold" him that land should have his butt kicked.