Some Like It Green

The Atlanta City Council – Community Development and HR Committee Meeting is today (Feb. 28), at 12:30pm in the Committee Room 2 (2nd Floor) – 55 Trinity Avenue, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 . They will be discussing the new Tree Ordinance amendment which will allow every homeowner in Atlanta to remove one tree per year from their yard, without replacement, regardless of health, size, age or significance.

The IPNA (Inman Park Neighborhood Association) has taken an official position opposing this amendment, but it is very important that we all take the time to voice our personal opposition to the City Council members. Please e-mail each of them – their addresses are below. Together we can beat this!

* mailto:cwinslow@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:norwood@onecallweb.com,
* mailto:cmuller@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:jmaddox@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:afauver@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:jmsheperd@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:fmoore@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:csmith@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:hshook@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:ilyoung@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:cmartin@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:ccmitchell@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:hlwillis@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:khall@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:narchibong@atlantaga.gov
* mailto:hshook@atlantaga.gov

General Atlanta City Council: 404.330.6030

Related:
Trees Atlanta website & the
http://treesatlanta.org/Resources/COAordinance.pdf

5 Comments so far

  1. Daniel (unregistered) on February 28th, 2006 @ 7:52 am

    Ugh. Seriously, shouldn’t trees be considered on a tree-by-tree basis instead of a blanket regulation without regard to individuality? And, really, replacement (somewhere) ought to be the norm – not the opposite.

    (oh, and I’ll have a comment on the nanogasm in a little bit)


  2. Cap'n Ken (unregistered) on February 28th, 2006 @ 8:38 am

    Is this the website of the IPNA? I thought it was Metroblogging Atlanta. Opinions are fine, dude, but try not to just pimp out the blog for a political effort.

    That said, the council’s approach to “reform” in the tree ordinance is ridiculous. Maybe it’s too restrictive now, but the “one a year” rule would do nothing to address actual conservation and appropriateness of tree removal, which is what we need.


  3. Maigh (unregistered) on February 28th, 2006 @ 8:44 am

    First, I’m not a dude.

    Secondly, with all the traditional bungalow homes and character being wiped out of the town/neighborhoods I’ve come to love, it scares me to think we’d let folks willy-nilly yank a tree out of the ground without thought because it…oh…I don’t know…blocks the light they could get on their porch to sunbathe in. Because they want to piss off a neighbor. Because because because.

    One of the things I *love* about ATL, one of the things that comforted me when I moved here – was how green it was.

    I’d hate to see that risked.

    And Ken, I may pimp for causes I believe in (that’s my right, my privilege), but I’m not your bitch, so I’d appreciate you watching your tone.

    Kissy boo!


  4. atlkortez (unregistered) on February 28th, 2006 @ 11:09 am

    I know this is a little different than the arguement that we just shouldn’t be tearing down our greenspace willy nilly, but cutting down a tree that is on your property, especially if it’s been there since the property was established is very harmful to the house itself. The tree provides the stability for the ground and surroundings of your abode, and taking that away will ruin the ecosystem, and cause your house to possibly shift and sink, let alone take on the extra water that was being used by the tree.


  5. atlkortez (unregistered) on February 28th, 2006 @ 11:26 am

    oh and maigh, even if you were ken’s “bitch” he still shouldn’t take that tone. It’s just rude.



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.