N&O Index Card

Subject/Name: Watersheds

Article(s) Referenced In:

1. Church, foes debate project in watershed - Ja 23 87 1D
2. Watershed zoning hearing sought - Ja 23 87 3D
3. City codes at issue in debate on church - Ja 24 87 1C
4. Conservation board member backs Crabtree watershed dam - Mr 4 87 5C
5. Watershed protection ordered; Phosphorus discharge into (Falls and Jordan) lakes limited - Mr 13 87 1
6. Watershed-development rules backed (by Raleigh Planning Commission) - Mr 26 87 1C
7. Triangle J studying plan to protect Falls watershed - Ap 16 87 1C
8. Water, sewer line moratorium near University Lake expected - Ap 23 87 2C
9. Watershed plan faces revision - Ap 23 87 11B
10. University Lake watershed building ban set - Ap 24 87 2D
11. Protection for Falls Lake watershed not likely - Ap 28 87 1C
12. Editorial: Water policy needed now - Ap 29 87 12A
13. Measure would require governments to enforce watershed pollution limits - Ap 30 87 21A
14. Neuse controls urged; Designation sought as nutrient-sensitive basin - My 1 87 1D
15. Watershed bill stirs troubled waters; Bill from Wake sends ripple through Durham - My 5 87 1
16. Wake wants watershed bill sent to study panel - My 12 87 18C
17. Panel will study anti-pollution bill - My 14 87 21A
18. Water experts, planners to study watersheds - My 14 87 24C
19. Panel urges study on protecting watersheds - My 21 87 30A
20. Pollution safeguards proposed for Neuse - My 30 87 1
21. Swift Creek development limited - Jy 17 87 1
22. Board advises study before Amberly ruling - Jy 22 87 2C
23. More study requested on Falls watershed - Jy 29 87 2C
24. Under the Dome: Watershed laws may be studied - Au 19 87 1
25. Rule change urged for watersheds (Wake Co.) - Se 3 87 1C
26. Editorial: Best watershed plan: Keep out - Se 9 87 12A
27. Watershed site rules stiffened (by Wake commissioners) - Se 22 87 1C
28. Wake mayors endorse bill for Falls Lake study - Se 23 87 2C
29. Watershed relaxation proposed - Oc 29 87 1
30. Watershed proposal attacked - Oc 30 87 1C
31. Group wants more houses in watershed; Outer Loop land offered for OK on 67 more units - No 11 87 1
32. Marina expansion might avoid county rules - No 11 87 2C
33. Editorial: Lake's rough sailing ... includes Loop loophole - No 13 87 24A
34. One of two subdivisions in watershed backed - No 13 87 2C
35. Cary's bid for watershed land control backed - No 19 87 1C
36. Carrboro developer begins drive for new subdivision in watershed - No 28 87 2C
37. Watershed proposal assailed; Critics say plan would create more government - De 4 87 1
38. Editorial: Referee needed for Falls - De 7 87 10A
39. Watershed plans rile some counties - De 13 87 1
40. Editorial: Falls Lake distractions - De 17 87 26A
41. Suit filed by Carrboro development foes dismissed - De 17 87 4C
42. Raleigh panel backs tough watershed rules - De 30 87 1C

See a typo in our data? Let us know and we'll fix it.