Gold Dome Live is moving!
Our new spot will allow us to get the news to you even faster and make commenting easier. Please bookmark the new site and sign up for our rss feed:
http://blogs.ajc.com/gold-dome-live/
AJC.com > Legislature > Blog > Archives > 2007 > January > 22 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USDemocrat says coastal rules too lax
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
A Democratic state lawmaker is urging the House of Representatives to go on record against a set of proposed changes to the state’s coastal development rules, calling them a “gross abuse of the trust that the people of this state placed in our state government.”
State Rep. Brian Thomas’ (D-Lilburn) resolution asks the state Board of Natural Resources to reject the rule changes.
One of the changes would prohibit developers from putting parking lots, sidewalks and other development within 25 feet of the tidal marsh. Thomas and other critics said that buffer is too small for the sea grasses, which serve as the nursery ground for crabs, shrimp and other sea creatures. The buffer should be at least 50 feet, Thomas said.
“The Board of Natural Resources has the responsibility to protect Georgia’s natural environment, not make it easier to destroy fragile ecosystems,” said Thomas during a brief speech on the House floor today. “Passing these proposed rules would have an enormous cost to the environmental quality of this vital area of our state.”
The new rules would pertain only to condominiums, hotels, subdivisions and other developers that want to build a community dock, marina, or any other structure that juts out into the tidal marsh. Private homeowners who want to build a personal dock would not be affected by the proposed regulations.
Coastal developers have argued the proposed rules would strengthen and clarify the Coastal Marshlands Protection Act. The ambiguity of the current law invites lawsuits, they said. Trying to comply with the law can cause developers to spend at least 3 1/2 years to get permission to build a community dock or marina.
Thomas is also threatening to introduce legislation to void the rules if the board approves them. The state Board of Natural Resources is scheduled to vote on the rules Tuesday in committee and on Wednesday as a full board.
Lawmakers introduced another resolution today calling on the federal Department of Justice to oppose the proposed hostile takeover of Delta Air Lines by US Airways.
“This is not in the best interest of our state, not in the best interest of the flying customers out there,” state Speaker Pro Tem Mark Burkhalter (R-Alpharetta) said while urging other lawmakers to cosponsor the resolution. “It is shown that duplication of routes in this particular proposed merger would do nothing but increase the pressure in upward trends in pricing for the consumer.”
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment | Categories: politics
Comments
By saundra
January 24, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this
Amazing how an effort to save the goose that lays the golden egg is going to be the ruin of all concerned. When the coast goes empty of life, like with the Intercoastal around the metro St. Pete area, the folks who moved for the fishing, wildlife, clean water, etc., lament the loss of it all, as the remove all the natural shoreline that filters the pollution that kills off the things they love.
By Bernard N. Goode
January 24, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this
I sure hope Rep. Thomas’ resolution will include some respect for the rights of the people who owns this marshfront land he wants to take and that he will review the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: “… nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”
By ED
January 24, 2007 02:56 PM | Link to this
So called “developers” are nothing more than opportunistic land pimps. They rape the original beauty of a place that made people want to move there in the first place. They’ll do it, just to turn a buck. When a “developer” gets control of nature’s beauty, he’ll destroy it then move on to the next spot. When you visit a marshland, do you want to look at a subdivision or the marsh? There are plenty of places that are in disrepair that could be remodeled without harming untouched marshland. Uncover a “developers” motive and you’ll find $$$$. Let them go make their money another way.