News-Record.com

Of course! Besides the obvious: toxic chemicals are taking their toll on your
environment; fuel costs are changing the average American family into phobic
depression-weary doomsdayers; plastic bottles, toys, food containers, hospital waste, cafeteria waste, dry cleaning bags, grocery bags, "Rubbermade", Tupperware and I could go on for days, are taking over the mountain sides of our country. The average consumer doesn't want to know about global warming or methane gas forming from our landfills. Every elected offical has an obligation to the constituancy to lobby for our welfare. The county commissioners are the grass roots agency of our people. That said, where, on the docket list of urgencies which are in the most need of money and attention, will our community environment fall? We (citizens and politicians alike) must heed the call of mother nature! If pure concience doesn't invigorate us to clean up the mess we've made and continue to contribute to then eventually, economics will.We won't be able to afford water in the ubiquitous bottle; we won't be able to buy our children's juice drinks in the tri-ply non recycleable boxes. We might have to go back to the old fashioned cantenes! What a nightmare!

I have many questions.
What does "Green Guilford" entail? Definitions of “green” seem to mean different things to different folks depending upon their role within the community. Many actions reflect reliance upon development corridors and loops rather than moving toward light rail which is a better option for the environment.
One wonders where the agronomists, farmers, landowners, and regular people were in the development of the proposal by the Green Build partners. In deference to the Green Giant, many average consumers are aware of the environmental constraints in Piedmont North Carolina. If the intent of the proposal was to encourage creative community problem solving, why were none of the above mentioned as helping develop the proposal? Education and organization won’t work unless there is a level playing field OR collaboration.
Will "Green Guilford" preserve the integrity of lifestyle as presented in the County and Greensboro's comprehensive plans? To date the news of projects comes across as "hit and miss" with regard to maintenance of community integrity. One council member aptly noted their regard for the maintenance of integrity depended upon the thorough homework of a community of residents. Hummm! Otherwise, the governing bodies may vote in deference to their comprehensive plans.
If the same folks manage the decisions as to the life and death of community projects are the major proponents of "Green Guilford", one would expect little change in the quality of our social/emotional interaction and further damage to the air and water quality. Developing a multi-jurisdictional group without ethical grounding (the commissioners do not have an ethics policy) would further compromise the rights of citizens who would not buy into this type of regionalism.
Without the answers to these questions, how does a commissioner know what they are supporting? Perhaps they will receive them at their work session on August 12.

Planning should be open, ethical and inclusive of many members of any given community. Education, or simply information exchange, lies at the heart of all progress. I hope that our community can progress beyond conventional land-use regulations to achieve the kind of conservation gains experienced by other municipalities who have implemented “Growing Greener”, “Smart-Growth” and “Conservation Development” principles.

Conservation begins with an understanding of the significance of the natural world and our dependence upon it to sustain human life.

The critical elements of a community’s “green infrastructure” are just as important as the conventional “gray infrastructure” of pipes, wires and roads.

Recognizing the enormous advantage of conservation development design approaches, local officials are amending zoning to allow the same number of houses that would have fit onto the land under a conventional build-out to be located on 1/3 the property, protecting the remaining areas to be permanently preserved open spaces and natural areas.

Mixed-use urban infill redevelopment must be included in every “Comprehensive Plan” to promote sustainable economic growth without continued geographic expansion.

Sustainable development designs are essentially local in their impacts, but the cumulative, positive effect of many such projects will ultimately produce community-wide and regional benefits over the long term.

We challenge both planners and developers to incorporate the tools of the landscape architect and the conservation biologist, which have generally been overlooked and neglected to incorporate an interconnected system of protected lands across our communities. We ask our planners to work closely with conservation professionals, water quality experts and wildlife officials to collaborate to produce a more balanced pattern of conservation and development. The current imbalance is related directly to the fact that conventional zoning ordinances are unimaginative, land-hogging development without any significant conservation components, except for the unbuildable wetlands, floodplains, and steep slopes. Zoning laws throughout the US are based on the same original source: the Zoning Enabling Act passed in 1926 by Congress, as proposed by Herbert Hoover. The US cannot continue this explosive increase in land consumption relative to population growth. Many states are consuming land at rates of 80% with only a growth rate of 12% (Pennsylvania, Puget Sound)…

Sound planning policies will be essential to conserve and protect our community’s natural and cultural heritage. Only when a community identifies its resources in a Comprehensive Plan can new growth respect the integrity of the community’s history and culture.

Briefly stated, the technique of conservation development is to outline the unbuildable areas, followed by the open spaces to be permanently protected first and to let its size and location become the central organizing element for the rest of the design, with roads planned last. We disagree with a future of the systematic conversion of every acre of buildable land into a developed use. Pennsylvania has a minimum 50% requirement for open space on buildable land where conservation development design has become a basic requirement.

Dr. Bill Holman with Duke’s Nicholas Institute is working in collaboration with UNC School of Government on the future of water in NC (engineering the use of storm water as a resource in new plans). Perhaps attorneys David Farren or Derb Carter with the Southern Environmental Law Center should be consulted. David Farren has worked with the Piedmont Triad Council of Governments on air quality non-attainment in the Triad and the SELC booklet “Clean Air for the Triad Action Agenda” would also make an excellent tool.