<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>EPA approves Philly's $2 billion green stormwater plan </title>
		<description>Discuss EPA approves Philly's $2 billion green stormwater plan </description>
		<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 06:29:54 --400</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/component/jcomments/feed/com_flexicontent/36757/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Fees In Place</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32953</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The requested rise in fees is to finance this plan. If this $2 billion plan hadn't been approved then we would have had to put in even more million gallon storage tanks under the streets which would have cost a lot more. We should be happy this would be approved and be vigilant that it's implemented in a way that reduces our combined sewer overflows.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:28:21 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32953</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Costs Either Way</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32951</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The EPA isn't costing us this money--the Clean Water and Clean Drinking Water Acts passed by Congress are. The fact that the EPA is flexible enough to accept our proposed plan--since we're already under consent decree after being sued by the state and federal governments--is a great thing. If we hadn't done the $2 billion "green" plan then we still would have had to finance putting even more gray water pipes under the city streets to stop untreated waste from being released into the Delaware and Schuylkill Rivers.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:25:15 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32951</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>suspect</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32947</link>
			<description><![CDATA[im with the first commentor. where is the money coming from? Already i'm being charged a stormwater fee for land with no running water on it. and if businesses are being charged for roof run off im sure its only a matter of time before the individual is also. Why is it that at times it feels like the city does everything it can to raise the cost of living here; property taxes steadily climbing, stormwater charges, trash pick up annual fees...what more will they try to squeeze outta me?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>MaltyDog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:56:09 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32947</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Going &quot;green&quot; and asphalt don't mix</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32931</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The news that Philadelphia's $2 billion plan got the nod from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is great, but hopefully the City will rethink the use of porous asphalt on Philadelphia's streets, particularly our small streets! There is nothing "green" about asphalt. Although asphalt can be a natural product, more commonly it is a waste product of the petroleum industry. And there's nothing green or healthy about that. In addition, asphalt does not work very well as a street paving material. No sooner is it laid down, then some contractor needs to dig it up and then you have unsightly and bumpy patches all over the place. Instead, why not use pervious pavers, as was done in the parking lot next to Lloyd Hall behind the Art Museum? There are all kinds of pavers to choose from. The website LakeSuperiorStr eams.org has some good information on that subject. And lastly, if the City is going green, perhaps they can incorporate lots of wild edible plants and fruit trees into the mix! After all, "going green" should mean "staying local"! Lynn Landes, founder The Philadelphia Society of Small Streets Wild Foodies of Philly]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Lynn Landes</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 10:58:26 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32931</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Green Infrastructure</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32929</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Green Infrastructure  Here is what some jurisdictions and neighborhoods are doing in Western Washington to implement green infrastructure solutions 8th Ave Street of Green   http://raindogdesigns.com/wordpress/?page_id=1877 City of Seattle RainWise http://raindogdesigns.com/wordpress/?page_id=1617 Totem Ocean Trailer Express Industrial Rain Gardens http://raindogdesigns.com/wordpress/?page_id=152 Collaborative campaign that supports all the above http://raindogdesigns.com/wordpress/?page_id=864]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Hymel</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 10:42:09 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32929</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>GOOD!</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32917</link>
			<description><![CDATA[GOOD! BIG BUSINESSES SHOULD BE TAXED MORE, IF NOT FROM CONGRESS, THEN AT THE LOCAL LEVEL SUCH AS THIS. I LOVE THIS IDEA. I DONT CARE IF UNIONS OR NON UNIONS DO THE WORK, AS LONG AS IT GETS DONE. THIS IS A GOOD INVESTMENT]]></description>
			<dc:creator>grom</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 07:53:20 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32917</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>LOVE IT!</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32916</link>
			<description><![CDATA[EPA IS A WONDERFUL AGENCY THAT SAVES US FROM DIRTY INDUSTRY TRYING TO POLLUTE THE AIR UNCONTROLLABLY. THIS IS AN INVESTMENT WE ALL NEED. GO PHILLY! GO EPA!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>grom</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 07:47:36 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32916</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>EPA's stealth tax on all of us</title>
			<link>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32915</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Dear Friends, No where does this article or others about this revised way of managing water, are the increased taxes and "fees" mentioned to pay for this. Nor is the outright gift to non competitive union labor mentioned. The Water Department has already rearranged our tax bills preparing for this increase to pay for this work and they say they will almost double the cost of water. Businesses have to pay a brand new tax for the water runoff from their roofs; are there other unpublished increases to pay for this $2 billion. Unlike what these stealth politicians think, these things are actually paid for by us, the residents. And with Councilman Clarke plotting and orchestrating taking over control of the Water Department and all this new revenue under his own wing, watch out!! EPA has never been the saint the press loves to make of them. In this case, these costs have not been directly connected to all of us who will pay for all of it, through local, state and federal taxes as well as these large increases in our water bills. Honesty in reporting and honesty by the EPA might be an environmental step forward, too. One might also demand that if this work is going to cost the citizens $2 billion, that all contracts must be bid among non-union and union firms to get it done right and to save us all 30-35% of the cost that unions wantonly jack onto all of their bids...for which there is no legal nor moral reason for a single tax payer to pay the unnecessary union's premium of $700,000,000 for this EPA work here.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Gardner</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 07:43:04 --400</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/36757-epastormwater#comment-32915</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
