FW_ _External_ _Mining Permit 92-10_ Deny a permit for the destruction of this public park land_

Johnson, Robert E
From: Sams, Dan
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 9:41 PM
To: NCMiningProgram
Subject: FW: [External] [Mining Permit 92-10] Deny a permit for the destruction of this public
park land.
From: Jeffrey Bridges [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 9:29 PM
To: Sams, Dan <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] [Mining Permit 92-10] Deny a permit for the destruction of this public park land.
My elected and app6linted officials,
l and imy faimily are(long time iresidents of the tdainglle. l currently Hive lin SW
Wake County, and l grew up lin Durham. My fair Hy frequently enjoys Niking
In Umstead State Park, and we geinullinelly Ibelllieve it is a crliticall Ipart of our
�plhysicall and imeintall IheaIltlh lin the Tiriainglle's llincreasiinglly urbanized
landscape. I'm opposed to granting any Ipeirmit for a iroolk quarry adjacent
to Umstead Park, and explicitly request that DEC. deny Wake Stone Corp's
application for a inew iroolk mine (Permit 92 10) due to the negative impacts
on Umstead State Park as Ipeir subsection 5), Crabtree Greek, the East
Coast Gireenway, recreation lin the ON Reedy Greek Corridor and the
t1hiree adjacent Ihorneowneirs.
As a preface, I'm frainkly disgusted that RDUAA Ihas any liinfiuenoe over the
use of tNis Ilaind for otheir than IleglitGrnate avliafioin Ipuirposes. If they doin't
ineed it for the airport Ipllain, theirs the Ilaind (wNlch RDUAA gallined Iby eimineint
domain llin the first (place) s1hoUld Ibe ireimoved from tlhellir cointr6l and
reverted to Ilocall autlh&lfies for the best Ipubllic use, wNlch is obviously inot
to Iproviide some Ibaolk iroom, sweetheart deal for Wake Stone to Ibulilld yet
1

another inoisy, IpoBllutiing, strllp mine adjacent to the Ipairk, With evein (less
einviiroinimeintall Ibuffeirs thain the oirigllinall, lillll advised operation, and the
added liinsullt of the u in coin sciona lble abrogation of the "Suinset Ciause" llin
the oirigllinall mi16ling Ipeirmit.
The DECK has the abHkty, and the duty to the IpulbBlic, to deiny a Ipeirmit for
this especiaMy iinapproprliate use of this Ilaind. If this Ilaind and the
surrouin6ing IparMaind are destroyed forever Iby Ipeirmittiing a strllp mine llin
this Ilocatioin, you WEI allso destroy forever the IpossibiVlity that our IpubBlic
�pairk coUld ever use this adjacent IpulbBlic Ilaind for the good of the Ipublic.
That oppoirtuinllty cost has a ireall and siginllficaint vallue to the mission of the
�pairk wNich ino oine cain geinullin6ly argue is offset Iby the Ibusiiness interests
of mine owineirs. Such a (loss woUld Ibe reap, and Ipeirmaineint. The Parks
department has alliready offered to trainsfeir imoiney to the allirpoirt autlh&lty llin
order to talke over stewairdsNip of this IpubBlic Ilaind toward the Ipuirpose of the
�public Ipairk, so cVeaidy the destruction of that IpossibiVlity woUld detract from
the Ipairk's abHkty to fUlfiEl its Ipuirpose llin the future. Therefore, any
application for a Ipeirmit to operate a Iprlivate strllp mine oin IpubBlic Ilaind
adjacent to this jewell of a IpubBlic Ipairk imust Ibe deinied, and the 50 year
suinset cVause llin the oirigllinall mi16ling Ipeirmit imust Ibe irellinstated.
Thank you for your due consideration of the Ipublic interest llin this imatteir.
Todd 1Biridges
3513 T�Imbeirwood Court
Ralleiglh, INC 27606
Jeffrey 1Biridges
3513 TIMBERWOOD CT
RALEIGH, North Cair6lkina 27606