Saturday Petition Booths Succesful!

Thanks to all who have visited our petition booths!
Both booths on the Albertson’s parking lot and the corner of Oakmont and Lake sharon succesfully received many signatures from Corinth residents today. We’ve talked to many concerned residents, and we will post quotes and videos shortly.

Current petition signatures: 977

Wording of the petition:
In regards to the proposed drilling site(s) at Lake Sharon Christian Center, we the citizens of the City of Corinth, respectfully request that the City Council and Mayor deny each and every variance requested by the Applicant. We further request that in consideration of our health, safety and welfare, the City Council of Corinth and Mayor require an impartial environmental impact study be completed at the applicant’s expense, before considering the said application.


Corinth Cares.

3 Responses so far »

  1. 1

    Larry and Sue said,

    We are concerned about how the release of chemicals, and the transporting
    of them may affect the health and welfare of our community. The roads they plan to use to transport these chemicals by truck – Oakmont and 2 lane FM2181 are already overburdened with traffic. A hundred trucks turning left onto FM 2181 with no traffic light is extremely dangerous to other traffic and the environment esp. our water supply.
    Please vote “NO” on exceptions to Safe Gas Well Drilling Practices.
    Larry and Sue

  2. 2

    Dave Goodwin said,

    I was reviewing the variance process for Corinth:

    B. The Director of Planning shall review the applicant and once complete, may place the variance request on the City Council agenda for consideration. in considering the variance, the City Council may take into account the following:

    1. Whether the operations proposed are safe and reasonable under the circumstances and conditions prevailing in the area, considering the particular location and the character of the improvements located thereon; and
    2. How the operations proposed compare to available alternatives; and
    3. Whether the operations proposed would conflict with the orderly growth and
    development of the City; and
    4. The economic consequence if the variance is not granted; and
    5. Whether the operations proposed adequately protect the health, safety and welfare of the public; and
    6. Whether the operations proposed provide acceptable access for fire suppression personnel and equipment.

    (based on resident’s response to this issue, I hope they take all 6 items into some serious account)

    In XTO’s written application

    Question – Describe how the level of health, safety and welfare of the public will be maintained if the variance is granted:

    Reply: “If the variance is granted, the level of health, safety, and welfare of the public will not be reduced.”

    – – they inserted the same exact single sentence reply on each variance application – not a single fact on how XTO can maintain levels that currently exist in Corinth (or if they even know what they are to begin with). How can they ever be held accountable to such a vague statement?

    How could our City Council accept this as any type of valid response on an application?

    Also, I have been looking into documented the variance process in other US cities and found statements reflecting the intent for variances in general:

    “A variance from the terms of this Ordinance shall not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that:
    A. Undue hardship will result if the variance is denied due to the existence of special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved.”

    “Economic consideration alone shall not constitute an undue hardship under the terms of this code as referenced in state statutes”

    “A variance does not change the zoning of the project site, so it cannot permit uses other than those already allowed under existing zoning.”

    I am not sure if these ideas are specifically included in the Corinth ordinances – if not, then something similar should be – if they are, then I can’t see how XTO’s variances would be acceptable based on their application documents.

  3. 3

    Tom Bowater said,

    Very well researched and presented. Please take the time to send this off to our City Leaders and appeal to them to read and strongly consider all of your points.

    I would think that it should becoming abundantly clear to all involved that XTO quite simply made a poor decision when they acquired Braden’s interest at Lake Sharon. I believe that the variance process itself was not designed or intended to accommodate a multi-billion company for it’s apparent lack of business acumen. Hopefully our Council will see their efforts as such and exercise wisdom.

Comment RSS · TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: