[Durham INC] P.S. Stream Buffers

[Melissa Rooney]

Apparently we citizens HAVE to come out in droves to have any chance of our 
concerns being heard over those of the development industry. 

Please, please, please write your city council members, particularly Mayor Bill 
Bell, with your support for more protections for our stream buffers. Widening 
from 50 -100 feet is a SMALL request, considering the protections of neighboring 
jurisdictions (read the HS article). The longer we wait to strengthen our stream 
buffer requirements, the more stream buffers we'll lose to development -- we 
don't have much land left..

council at ci.durham.nc.us, Bill.Bell at durhamnc.gov ; farad.ali at durhamnc.gov ; Eugene.Brown at durhamnc.gov ; diane.catotti at durhamnc.gov ; Cora.Cole-McFadden at durhamnc.gov ; Howard.Clement at durhamnc.gov ; mike.woodard at durhamnc.gov, Tom.Bonfield at durhamnc.gov


(remove any spaces in the above email addresses before sending)

And if you can also send your letters (to the city council) to the editor of the 
Herald Sun, that'd be great too!

http://www.heraldsun.com/pages/letter_submit

or

bashley at heraldsun.com


Melissa (Rooney)







________________________________
From: Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>
To: inc-list at rtpnet.org; durhamenviro at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, November 4, 2010 2:12:57 PM
Subject: [Durham INC] Council stops move to widen stream buffers from 50 to 100 
feet


See below. Are you kidding me !? This just keeps getting more and more 
insulting. The widening of stream buffers from 50 to 100 feet was one of the big 
conclusions/recommendations by the EEUDO (Environmental Enhancements to the UDO) 
committee that stemmed from the REAP (resolution for environmentally responsible 
amendments and protections to the UDO) which was presented to the INC over a 
year ago.

ANY impact to improve water quality is necessary and is already far belated. And 
the EEUDO committee members who met for many hours and worked very hard on their 
recommendations certainly thought that widening the stream buffers from 50 to 
100 feet would have a significant impact.

I'd like to know just what the council means by 'minor.' Doesn't sound very  
scientific...

Melissa (Rooney)



----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Tina <tinamotley at earthlink.net>
To: Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>; rcyoung4 at frontier.com
Sent: Thu, November 4, 2010 1:21:53 PM
Subject: Durham's Buffers

 
Council stops move to widen stream buffers. Shift from 50 to 100 feet 
would have 'minor' impact on water quality[You may need to register 
to view this article.] 
http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story_news_durham/10156480/article-Council-stops-move-to-widen-stream-buffers?instance=main_article


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20101104/2e10e7f6/attachment.html>