UNC
Wheww. It appears they've found the barrels of toxic waste that went missing in January from the demolition of the University's Medical Science Research Building. This hasn't assuaged the concerns of subcontractor Southern Site & Environmental Corporation, who apparently took the barrels away to test them, after having their complaints about the presence of toxic waste at the site rebuffed. According the firm's lawyer, they found mercury and arsenic after being assured that the site was safe. The company believes the University has broken state law by exposing its workers to the toxic waste; the University says the waste was well-contained and that workers had been instructed to stay away from it. The state Department of Environment and Natural Resources is investigating.
[The subcontractor] expressed their concerns last Thursday in a letter to Doug Holyfield, director of compliance for the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
The Chapel Hill Town Council asked for more time to adequately review proposals. They asked for concept plans before receiving the official modification request. What was UNC's response? F--k you.
"We did take a serious look at that request," said Nancy Suttenfield, UNC vice chancellor for finance and administration. "But it's neither fiscally responsible nor practical."- Daily Tarheel, 3/16/04
(More on the specific changes proposed in today's Chapel Hill Herald.)
Coming through loud and clear, Nancy. Just don't be suprised if the Town Council doesn't have enough time in your 90-day lighting review to get the information it needs in to make a responsible decision and has to turn the application down. What you seem to think is cheaper, could end up costing UNC (and the state/taxpayers) a lot more.
Guest Post by Nick Eberlein
Now that UNC and Chapel Hill are prepping for new discussions over zoning and campus expansion, it seems like the editorial pages in the local papers have been handed their collective wet dream: "contentious negotiations," always ripe fodder for the opinion pages.
Woe is me, however, when I read rants like yesterday's editorial in The Daily Tar Heel entitled "Hostile Intention." I'm now convinced that what hampers both UNC and the town the most during these times of critical decision-making and long-term planning is the tendency of some in our community to blindly hop to one side of the fence or the other in reaction to either side's "hostility."
As both a UNC student and town native, I take strong issue with the DTH editorial board's assertion that "town residents would ideally like to live in a college town without the students." Nothing is further from the truth.
If you have been following this site (3/1/04 & 2/27/04), you know that on Monday, the Chapel Hill Town Council stated clearly that they felt the 90-day review period for UNC Development Plan Modifications is way too short. In fact, it amounts to little more than a rubber stamping of UNC projects. UNC Administrators' insistence on the lighting-round review is a clear indicator of their negligent attitude toward the Town. Chapel Hill would never make a decision that would affect UNC this much without extensive hemming and hawing and making sure everyone was happy.
Activists, start your engines! There are three great events tonight, addressing development of Carolina North, workers' rights on campus, and homophobia in the classroom. (All pertaining to UNC, hmmm.) Which one are you going to?
1. Town Council Public Hearing on the Horace Williams Citizen's Commitee Report and on OI-4. Starts at 7pm, Chapel Hill Town Hall. There are lots and lots of meetings relating to UNC's development plans, but this Monday is one not to miss. The Chapel Hill Town Council will hold public hearings on two issues that will define the future deliberations about Carolina North. I'll be there.
2. The Workers Solidarity Coalition teach-in about the history of workers struggles at UNC. Starts at 7pm, Greenlaw 101, UNC-CH. Sounds great! Panelists include: Fred Battle, leaders of the 1969 Lenoir strike, Keith Edwards, leaders of the Housekeepers Movement and UE 150. I hate that I will be missing this.
Pages
About Us
OrangePolitics is a not-for-profit website for discussing progressive perspectives on politics, planning, and public policy in Orange County, NC. Opinions are those of their authors. Learn more.
Community Guidelines
By using this site, you agree to our community guidelines. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in moderation or eviction.
Zircon - This is a contributing Drupal Theme
Design by
WeebPal.