A stretch of land along Ratcliff Cove Road — quiet, rural, long-defined by fields, creek-bottoms and generational ties — became the focal point of a larger question April 14, as Waynesville Town Council took up an annexation request that would determine not just what gets built there, but how the town chooses to grow.
The request, brought forward by a private property owner, sought to annex the western portion of a 57.5-acre parcel tied to Phase II of the Valleywood Farms subdivision. Planning staff laid out the contours of the proposal after the town’s planning board approved the plan on Feb. 19.
The petition, explained by Assistant Development Services Director Olga Grooman, involved land already adjacent to town boundaries, currently situated within Waynesville’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. Access to sewer infrastructure — not zoning, not density — was the hinge on which the request turned.
Phase II, already approved as a subdivision by the planning board, calls for 148 single-family homes and sits next to phase I, where 115 homes have already been planned and, in many cases, built. A portion of the property to the north is already inside town limits, meaning some development could proceed regardless of the annexation decision.
Speaking on behalf of property owner John Queen, Patrick Bradshaw of Civil Design Concepts framed the annexation as a practical, policy-consistent step that would allow a previously approved subdivision to move forward with access to municipal sewer, arguing that the project meets Waynesville’s adopted land-use plan, fits within designated growth areas and delivers relatively attainable new housing compared to similar builds in the county.
Emphasizing that the town would not bear upfront infrastructure costs, Bradshaw noted that roads, water and sewer would be installed privately before being turned over to the town for long-term maintenance. Upon annexation, homeowners would be subject to town property taxes and would also become utility customers, providing a revenue stream for that maintenance.
That tradeoff — private investment up front, public responsibility long term — became a central theme as the discussion unfolded.
Bradshaw also highlighted planned traffic accommodations and multiple access points, maintaining that the development had already been reviewed and approved through the proper channels and that annexation was simply the mechanism needed to extend services and complete the project as designed. Phase I sales — largely in the high-$300,000 to mid-$400,000 range — serve as evidence of demand for the product.
Council members, however, pushed beyond the procedural explanation, probing how the proposal fit into Waynesville’s long-range vision and what it would mean for the town’s infrastructure, character and affordability. The property was already zoned for low-to-medium density residential use, a designation consistent with the town’s 2035 land use plan that allows single-family housing at roughly three-to-four units per acre.
Tension came into full view once public comment began. A line of speakers, many with deep roots in the area, approached the podium to voice opposition rooted not in technicalities, but in identity, economy and place.
“Phase one was a mistake, and phase two is an insult to local businesses and the people of Haywood County,” said Trey Ballance, a general contractor and sixth generation resident of Ratcliff Cove. “This developer is a national giant that is denying our local trades employment opportunities. They’re not hiring our local electricians, plumbers or carpenters. They’re not buying from our local suppliers.”
Don Smart, a fourth-generation farmer raised in Crabtree, has been one of the most vocal opponents of large-scale development for years now. As president of the Haywood County Farm Bureau, Smart has used the organization’s annual legislative breakfast as a platform to decry the loss of the county’s farmland — nearly half in the last 40 years. At the most recent breakfast, Smart famously said he told the nation’s largest homebuilder, in response to an offer to buy his farm, that D.R. Horton would be “a-drivin’ a coal truck in hell before he builds a house on my farm.”
Smart’s fiery comments to town council were well-received.
“We have lost so much farmland,” he said. “We got less than 50,000 acres left now in Haywood County, and by 2040, we’ll lose 40% or more if you continue to do what you’re doing, building these cookie cutter cluster houses.”
The annexation, in Smart’s view, wasn’t a passive administrative step. It was an active choice that would determine whether large-scale development could proceed in its current form.
The comments layered economic concerns over cultural concerns — housing prices, outside buyers and a sense that development patterns were shifting away from local needs.
For others, the issue was the strain on social infrastructure. Jonathan Creek resident Tabitha Ross mentioned another sprawling development happening well outside Waynesville’s jurisdiction.
“We farm the land right beside of it. The runoff water that is going to happen from this development is going to ruin our corn, and we barely have enough land now to grow corn for our farm and for our cattle,” Ross said. “My thing is, like, you’re letting this happen. You know our hospital — I was in health care for 18 years — you know our hospital only holds 154 beds in our hospital. Our schools are at capacity now, and you are allowing these people to come in and build more homes, which brings more people, which our town cannot hold, our schools cannot hold it, our hospital cannot hold it.”
The cumulative effect of the testimony was unmistakable — nearly unanimous and heavily weighted against the proposal.
After nearly an hour of public comment, the hearing closed and the focus shifted back to council.
Council Member Jon Feichter framed the annexation as a defining, irreversible choice about Waynesville’s future, arguing that the council wasn’t simply evaluating whether a development met technical standards.
Drawing on months of reviewing maps, visiting the site and speaking with residents, he said the proposal forced a broader reckoning with whether large-scale subdivisions align with local incomes, infrastructure and the town’s long-term character.
He structured his opposition around three tests — who benefits, what kind of growth is being encouraged and what long-term obligations the town assumes — and concluded that the project falls short on all three.
“Growth is inevitable, but how we grow is a choice,” Feichter said.
Pointing to Phase I home prices and local income data, he questioned whether the development serves Waynesville residents, contrasted incremental neighborhood growth with large, multi-phase buildouts and warned that annexation creates permanent service obligations that compound over time.
And then, there’s the affordable housing issue — by his math, Feichter said that at least 75 of the 115 homes that have been sold had a median sales price of “a little over $440,000.” According to Canopy MLS, in February the average sales price of a home in Haywood County rose 12.1% year-over-year to $429,000.
“By that measure, a family would need to earn about $125,000 a year to afford a home at that price,” Feichter said. “Waynesville’s median household income is $55,000 a year. Now that by itself, doesn’t make this development wrong, but it does tell us something important about who it serves … Growth is inevitable, but how we grow is on us. I vote no.”
As the applause for Feichter’s scathing dissent faded, Mayor Gary Caldwell asked for a motion either to approve or reject the annexation request. Mayor Pro Tem Chuck Dickson motioned for approval and was seconded by Anthony Sutton. No further discussion on the motion ensued. Council Member Julia Freeman voted with Dickson and Sutton as jeers came from what had become a hostile audience, with some in the crowd saying the three “ought to be ashamed” of themselves.
Caldwell then gaveled a five-minute recess as members of the crowd stepped forward — some to thank Feichter, some to heckle Dickson. Smart singled out Caldwell, who could be heard defending his board.
“John Queen’s the one that decided to sell,” Caldwell said.
In a letter to the editor sent to The Smoky Mountain News on April 19, Mayor Pro Tem Chuck Dickson defended his vote to annex by anchoring it in the town’s 2035 comprehensive plan, arguing the decision was not discretionary but a direct obligation to follow a community-driven blueprint shaped by hundreds of residents and passed unanimously in 2020 by every current board member.
Dickson said the plan deliberately channels growth into areas served by water and sewer and specifically designates the project site for single-family housing, meaning annexation aligns with both the location and type of development the town had already agreed to pursue.
He also framed the vote as a financial decision aimed at avoiding tax increases, arguing that rising costs leave the town with only three realistic options — cut services, raise taxes or grow the tax base. He positioned annexation as the only path that maintains current service levels without shifting the burden onto existing residents, making growth not just a planning choice but a fiscal necessity.
“I voted to annex to protect the wallets and pocketbooks of Waynesville taxpayers,” Dickson wrote. “My duty is to the people of the Town of Waynesville, and my vote was for them.”