Petition Tag - hill
1. Help us get authorization for the use of safety amber lights
The Howard Beach Citizens Safety Patrol is a official non-for-profit organization that works on quality of life issues and patrols our Howard Beach community. For three years we have been in contact with the NYPD expressing our need for safety amber lights, to protect the community and our members, we patrol in marked organizational patrol cars and assist all first responders in emergency situations. For example when assisting at a car accident, we need to secure the scene until emergency personnel arrive by using our amber safety lights. We have continuously been denied the use of our amber lights, by the NYPD, even though we have given ample examples of our assistance and meet all qualifications by law in their use.
On Macedonia Hill in Lawrence County, Ohio, 45 families (The Macedonia 45) scratch out a living by hauling water into their homes every week in order to survive.
Keith & Lizabeth Brammer, along with their two teenage children, face great difficulties since Keith is a paraplegic. The water table, now historically low, prevents the drilling of wells. For over 1000 days people have made empty promises.
The Macedonia 45 have no clean, fresh running water. Only a mile away, Walmart and Lowe's use gallons of water every hour! Let's join together! Give them Water!
Keith & Lizabeth Brammer, along with their two teenage children, face great difficulties since Keith is a paraplegic. The water table, now historically low, prevents the drilling of wells. For over 1000 days people have made empty promises.
The Macedonia 45 have no clean, fresh running water. Only a mile away, Walmart and Lowe's use gallons of water every hour! Let's join together! Give them Water!
3. Save Beech Hill Farm Storage, Westerleigh, Bristol BS37 8QF
Beech Hill Farm, Westerleigh, Bristol BS37 8QF, have been providing storage facilities to the local community and surrounding local area for more than 9 years.
With high waiting lists at other facilities this is a much needed resource for the local area.
The facilities compliment the surrounding countryside and wildlife that have clearly made their home and they happily coexist.
The land its self is unable to be used for agriculture purpose, because of the previous landfill use. The owners have made use of the land and provided a much needed resource for the community.
With high waiting lists at other facilities this is a much needed resource for the local area.
The facilities compliment the surrounding countryside and wildlife that have clearly made their home and they happily coexist.
The land its self is unable to be used for agriculture purpose, because of the previous landfill use. The owners have made use of the land and provided a much needed resource for the community.
4. Tullos Hill Meadowlands & Deer Park
Controversial plans to plant 89,000 trees on Tullos Hill, Aberdeen, are under fire from the public, community councils, animal charities and experts. This petition seeks to preserve this crucial wildlife habitat as the rich meadowland it already is. The city has approved plans to build on other nearby meadows, which will be lost forever.
The tree planting scheme would require a cull of roe deer - because it is allegedly the cheapest option to protect the trees. The deer have lived in this area for generations, live approximately 6-7 years, and according to some accounts are nearly tame. Non-lethal ways to protect the trees exist – but the supporters of the tree scheme refuse to spend money on these when killing is cheaper.
The Scottish Society for the Protection of Animals has called the tree scheme ‘abhorrent and absurd’ – a sentiment shared by the thousands who have already signed petitions to save the deer. There is no evidence the deer are in any danger of starving or over-population; the City is belatedly making sweeping statements that culls are part of land management. The original reason the cull was proposed is, and remains, the tree scheme. There was a public consultation – but shooting the deer was never mentioned at the time (even though using rabbit fences was mentioned). This consultation put out a misleading impression that animal issues had been thought through and only the rabbits were worth mentioning. This is one of the reasons the objections to the scheme are so strong.
The tree scheme also requires several years of weed-killer spraying, the effects and cost of which are unknown at this time. The proponents of the tree scheme also plan gorse clearance (gorse provides year-round food and shelter to many forms of wildlife), loss of feeding and breeding meadow and grass lands, and loss or damage to small archaeological sites which are dotted all over the hill. There are several large Bronze Age cairns on the site, which would be obstructed by trees.
There is no justification for changing one ecosystem for another - particularly when the previous attempt failed (due to weeds, vandalism, poor soil, wind and deer browsing) – which cost the taxpayer a minimum of £43,800. Perhaps there would have been less deer damage if the recommended size of tree guards had been used, but instead of the 120cm guards recommended 90cm ones were put in.
There is no proof that the new tree planting scheme would be more successful than the previous attempt. It is now recognised that meadows are being lost at a phenomenal rate, and this petition calls upon the relevant bodies to protect and enhance Tullos Hill. These are some, but not all, of the reasons why this scheme – originally a Liberal Democrat election pledge – should be abandoned.
The tree planting scheme would require a cull of roe deer - because it is allegedly the cheapest option to protect the trees. The deer have lived in this area for generations, live approximately 6-7 years, and according to some accounts are nearly tame. Non-lethal ways to protect the trees exist – but the supporters of the tree scheme refuse to spend money on these when killing is cheaper.
The Scottish Society for the Protection of Animals has called the tree scheme ‘abhorrent and absurd’ – a sentiment shared by the thousands who have already signed petitions to save the deer. There is no evidence the deer are in any danger of starving or over-population; the City is belatedly making sweeping statements that culls are part of land management. The original reason the cull was proposed is, and remains, the tree scheme. There was a public consultation – but shooting the deer was never mentioned at the time (even though using rabbit fences was mentioned). This consultation put out a misleading impression that animal issues had been thought through and only the rabbits were worth mentioning. This is one of the reasons the objections to the scheme are so strong.
The tree scheme also requires several years of weed-killer spraying, the effects and cost of which are unknown at this time. The proponents of the tree scheme also plan gorse clearance (gorse provides year-round food and shelter to many forms of wildlife), loss of feeding and breeding meadow and grass lands, and loss or damage to small archaeological sites which are dotted all over the hill. There are several large Bronze Age cairns on the site, which would be obstructed by trees.
There is no justification for changing one ecosystem for another - particularly when the previous attempt failed (due to weeds, vandalism, poor soil, wind and deer browsing) – which cost the taxpayer a minimum of £43,800. Perhaps there would have been less deer damage if the recommended size of tree guards had been used, but instead of the 120cm guards recommended 90cm ones were put in.
There is no proof that the new tree planting scheme would be more successful than the previous attempt. It is now recognised that meadows are being lost at a phenomenal rate, and this petition calls upon the relevant bodies to protect and enhance Tullos Hill. These are some, but not all, of the reasons why this scheme – originally a Liberal Democrat election pledge – should be abandoned.
5. Beacon Hill Community Petition - Alcohol Impact Area Initiative
Beacon Hill neighbors have started a project called the Alcohol Impact Area Initiative (AIAI) in an effort to get an Alcohol Impact Area for the hill.
Several years ago the Washington State Liquor Control Board allowed certain areas such as Pioneer Square, the Downtown Core, and the University District to restrict or ban the sale of specific types of low cost, high sugar, high alcohol content beer and wine. These drinks are the beverages of choice for many chronic public inebriates.
Many neighbors have stories of people passing out on their lawn, drinking and loitering at bus stops and being harassed for money outside local stores or on sidewalks. Stories like these were the impetus to create the AIAI.
The process to get an AIA on Beacon Hill will likely be long and involved and the AIAI needs your help in supporting this effort. You can help by signing this petition and also by collecting cans and bottles of the targeted beverages for evidence to officials. A list of the targeted beverages as well as more details on the project can be found on the Facebook page (Beacon AIAI) as well.
Several years ago the Washington State Liquor Control Board allowed certain areas such as Pioneer Square, the Downtown Core, and the University District to restrict or ban the sale of specific types of low cost, high sugar, high alcohol content beer and wine. These drinks are the beverages of choice for many chronic public inebriates.
Many neighbors have stories of people passing out on their lawn, drinking and loitering at bus stops and being harassed for money outside local stores or on sidewalks. Stories like these were the impetus to create the AIAI.
The process to get an AIA on Beacon Hill will likely be long and involved and the AIAI needs your help in supporting this effort. You can help by signing this petition and also by collecting cans and bottles of the targeted beverages for evidence to officials. A list of the targeted beverages as well as more details on the project can be found on the Facebook page (Beacon AIAI) as well.
6. Support East Hill Expansion
East Hill Expansion means:
More Jobs
Future Growth
Increased Infrastructure
Increased Revenue
More Jobs
Future Growth
Increased Infrastructure
Increased Revenue
7. Keep High Density Housing out of Mercer Island's Neighborhoods
KEEP HIGH DENSITY HOUSING OUT OF FIRST HILL
• The Mercer Island City Council is proposing to surplus city property, and to build an "innovative demonstration housing project."
• This proposed project is high density "cottage housing" built on a 30,000 square foot property in the middle of the First Hill Single Family Neighborhood.
• Many different rationales have been expressed for the project (paying for emergency well, avoiding a lawsuit from an environmental group, affordable housing for our workforce, the Growth Management Act, options for people downsizing, sustainable environmental housing) although the Council has not clearly stated the primary reasons for the development.
The neighbors of First Hill and the greater Mercer Island community are concerned about spot zoning for high density housing in single-family neighborhoods. We believe this housing project will create a negative impact on our community for the following reasons:
1) It changes the charm and existing characteristics of the First Hill neighborhood.
2) It sets a precedent for further high density housing in all other Mercer Island single-family neighborhoods.
3) It is discriminatory to other neighbors who purchased homes believing they were buying in an area where houses are zoned for minimum 9600 square foot lots.
4) It will create increased density and problems to an area not adequately designed for such traffic, parking, & maintenance problems.
5) Is not an effective or sustainable method for meeting the standards of the Growth Management Act.
6) It does not address the true needs of affordable housing for our workforce, and is potentially discriminatory to potential residents that do not work on Mercer Island.
7) It is the first step toward overlaying Mercer Island's high density housing and business district with the charm and beauty of one of Mercer Island's single-family residential neighborhoods.
• The Mercer Island City Council is proposing to surplus city property, and to build an "innovative demonstration housing project."
• This proposed project is high density "cottage housing" built on a 30,000 square foot property in the middle of the First Hill Single Family Neighborhood.
• Many different rationales have been expressed for the project (paying for emergency well, avoiding a lawsuit from an environmental group, affordable housing for our workforce, the Growth Management Act, options for people downsizing, sustainable environmental housing) although the Council has not clearly stated the primary reasons for the development.
The neighbors of First Hill and the greater Mercer Island community are concerned about spot zoning for high density housing in single-family neighborhoods. We believe this housing project will create a negative impact on our community for the following reasons:
1) It changes the charm and existing characteristics of the First Hill neighborhood.
2) It sets a precedent for further high density housing in all other Mercer Island single-family neighborhoods.
3) It is discriminatory to other neighbors who purchased homes believing they were buying in an area where houses are zoned for minimum 9600 square foot lots.
4) It will create increased density and problems to an area not adequately designed for such traffic, parking, & maintenance problems.
5) Is not an effective or sustainable method for meeting the standards of the Growth Management Act.
6) It does not address the true needs of affordable housing for our workforce, and is potentially discriminatory to potential residents that do not work on Mercer Island.
7) It is the first step toward overlaying Mercer Island's high density housing and business district with the charm and beauty of one of Mercer Island's single-family residential neighborhoods.
Buckhurst Hill Parish Council wish to develop a new playground in Roding Valley.
This will be 1/6th of an acre in size, will has equipment over 12ft high and is sited close to residents gardens and will mean removing trees and bulldozing the landscape. The council also propose to change the existing playground into a ball park with teen shelter.
This will cost a 1/4 of a million pounds, yes thats £250,000 pounds of council tax money. This is plain daft, when all that is needed is to upgrade the existing playground at a fraction of the cost, ditch the ball park and teen shelter.
We need your support to object to this obscene development.
This will be 1/6th of an acre in size, will has equipment over 12ft high and is sited close to residents gardens and will mean removing trees and bulldozing the landscape. The council also propose to change the existing playground into a ball park with teen shelter.
This will cost a 1/4 of a million pounds, yes thats £250,000 pounds of council tax money. This is plain daft, when all that is needed is to upgrade the existing playground at a fraction of the cost, ditch the ball park and teen shelter.
We need your support to object to this obscene development.