Comments

Evets wrote on Jul 15, 2009 3:44 PM:

" The trashy eyesore gravel pits were mined years ago. At that time there were few regulations and the land wasn't worth much. There have been many responsible gravel operations in the past 20 years, but no one knows they even took place because of the good reclamation. Millions of tons of gravel was mined on the Breeden farm for the Glenn/Parks Interchange, but a year or two after the project you couldn't tell where it happened. To call gravel mining evil is a terribly distorted view of a building block of our society. "




No thank you wrote on Jul 14, 2009 4:47 PM:

" I agree with Matt when he says "evil is not necessary."

We can have development, and use resources, in thoughtful ways that take into account the whole community and the whole area. And, they can leave something behind for future generations rather than spoil, or use up, our resources and leave nothing for the future.

This is not a small, insular, world any more. What each of us does affects others in countless ways. If this man wants to level his property, and leave a wasteland behind, his actions affect the whole community. "




Matt wrote on Jul 12, 2009 10:49 AM:

" Believing that there is any such thing as "necessary evil" is why all the good politicians are forced to pick only one of two political parties, and when they get there, are turned into nothing productive at all. Evil is not necessary. We need to get past that. KIng George was a necessary evil. Until enough people figured out another way. "




towneil wrote on Jul 11, 2009 10:52 PM:

" like it or not, gravel is needed for alot of different things. Most of anchorage is built on gravel out the palmer pit on the glenn. If the man wants to level his lot, then so what. it is HIS lot. maybe I could come by your house and tell you what to do with your property. "




No thank you wrote on Jul 11, 2009 4:47 AM:

" The tone of the editorial about gravel pits seemed to convey gravel pit operations are a "necessary evil" that we can't do anything about, and we should just all fold our hands and hope for the best, and be trusting and accepting of anything for the sake of future business development.

I find such an attitude distasteful, and deplorable, on many levels. I do not consider it to be a service to the community members. However, it is of service to the ends of big business whose sole goal is their profit margin. "




No thank you wrote on Jul 11, 2009 4:37 AM:

" Another thing that was deeply concerning about this editorial was the remark "he dang sure better be sure he doesn't mine into the water table."This is not something that should be left up to chance, the mine owners hoped for benevolence, or vain promises!

Houston's council must be held fully accountable, and the citizens must speak up. If wells might be damaged, this could lead to unforseen health problems down the road. Those with wells in the area are advised to insist on legal protection, and legal recourse, in the event their wells become contaminated. "




No thank you wrote on Jul 11, 2009 4:24 AM:

" Thank you for your thoughts, but it is never a service to say that "neighbors concerns may not have much leverage."

When people speak up, organize, and get involved it always makes a difference. No one ever has to put up with whatever they get. We always have a choice and are much more powerful than many would like us to believe.

Furthermore the article noted the EPA whose approval is not "quite the accomplishment" as stated. EPA standards are the bare minimum, and citizens have every right to demand more. "




sick of whinning wrote on Jul 10, 2009 7:41 PM:

" 75 acres, where did that come from. you spoke of the meeting last night.where you there, if so, where did you get your info.. that is more land than the entire parcell. this is obviously another pot stirrer, who will stop at nothiong to try to get his way and influence people through lies and deceit. i think we all know who this sounds like, if you were at meeting just more factless pot stirring. "




Houston Voter wrote on Jul 10, 2009 11:05 AM:

" Houston Resident needs to get the facts straight. The Borough Planning Office's summary of the project states, "The total area on which the operation will occur is 69 acres and up to 50 surface acres will be disturbed for narural resource extraction." The request to the Corps of Engineers was for "approval to remove approximately 5 acres of peat near milepost 53." And just what laws and procedures are being disregarded? Some folks will say anything to stop progress. Stop spreading lies in an attempt to kill this project. "




Eyesores wrote on Jul 10, 2009 10:28 AM:

" To many of theses sites are never reclaimed. They sit there for decades looking ugly and sometimes turn into dump sites. They most certainly turn into ATV parks. Buffers should be at least 100 feet on all sides. There should be a time period required to remove the gravel then replace the topsoil and replant it. Not rocket science just do the right thing. "




valley girl wrote on Jul 10, 2009 10:13 AM:

" I understand the need for develpoment in the valley. We do ,however, need responsible development with a strong focus on perserving the unique beauty and tranquility of the valley. I belive that raping this land, just to make a buck will end up costing us so much more in the long run. Besides when the valley ends up just like every other crowded crime ridden city where will everyone move to to 'get away fro it all'? "




Houston Resident wrote on Jul 10, 2009 8:27 AM:

" This is not about leveling a hill. The plan includes removing 75 ACRES of peat. Many statements in this article are incorrect, as per last night's meeting. This is not a done deal, and is NOT a good thing. It IS another example of the council disregarding laws and procedures. "




chairlift wrote on Jul 9, 2009 10:45 PM:

" when will the mat su put a chairlify in at t and j's gravel pit? that topsoil pile is bigger than mount susitna. "