Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 05-22-02 Supplement Department Report Martin Marietta SU-24-02, SU-25-02, V-26-02, V-27-02, UV-28-02 May 22, 2002 To: Board of Zoning Appeals From: Department of Community Services Re: Martin Marietta Petitions Supplement to Department Report SU~24~02, SU~25~02, V~26~02, V~27~02, UV~28~02 Enc: Comment letters from Spectra Environmental Group (3) Report from Scott Brewer, Urban Forester In May 2001, the Board held hearings for a Special Use application to allow surface and underground mining on the Mueller property. Based on that experience, members questioned whether the City possessed the expertise to properly evaluate such a petition and determine whether Special Use approval should be granted. The Board asked the Department to procure a consultant with expertise in sand and gravel mining to help them objectively review such petitions. In September of 2001, the Department began a search for a mining consultant. They requested Statements of Qualifications from various firms throughout the country. The goal was to find a consultant that had technical expertise about sand and gravel mining, including open pit, dredging and underground operations, and knowledge of and experience with the regulation of mining from a government perspective. The Department chose Spectra Environmental Group, Inc. from Latham, New York. Spectra surpassed all of the requirements of the Department. The staff member who would be leading this project was also a major factor. The Department's main contact from Spectra is Greg Sovas, PE, and Vice President of Governmental Affairs. Mr. Sovas has over thirty~two years of experience in New York State government with the Department of Environmental Conservation and Department of Health in the divisions of Mineral Resources, Air Resources, Land and Forests. He has over twenty~one years of experience as the head of the mineral resources programs in the Department of Environmental Conservation becoming the first Director of the newly created Division of Mineral Resources in 1982. As Director, Mr. Sovas was responsible for the administration and management of the state's nonrenewable natural resources. He was responsible for the implementation of the state's Mined Land Reclamation Law regulating the mining industry in New York that is estimated at $1.5 billion annually in market value. The Department entered into a contract with Spectra Environmental Group for consulting services as they related to mining within the township. Spectra was hired to evaluate any mining proposals and assist the city in developing zoning regulations related to mining. The initial visit to Carmel entailed a site visit to Martin Marietta's May 22, 2002 10f4 Department Report Martin Marietta SU-24-02, SU-25-02, V-26-02, V-27-02, UV-28-02 operations and meetings with various stakeholder groups, including homeowners and city officials. From the date of filing of the applications before you, the Department has been working hand in hand with Spectra to evaluate the petitions and make recommendations and changes that will be beneficial for everyone involved. The Department and their consultant worked considerably to address the environmental, technical and visual issues associated with the application. The mined land use plan, reclamation plan and commitments before you represent this work and address, from the Department's viewpoint, the issues raised by the public and the Board. The Department believes that Martin Marietta has met all the criteria set forth for Special Use approval in ZO 21.4 and thus recommends Board approval of SU 24,02, SU 25,02, V, 26,02, and V, 27,02. The Department further recognizes that great community benefit can be achieved by the relocation of the existing processing plant to the east side of Hazel Dell Parkway and recommends approval of UV 23,02. Following are the Department's comments regarding specific issues raised by the public and the Board: A. Wait for mining ordinance to be complete: This surface mining proposal arises prior to the adoption of an overall mining ordinance in response to the desires of neighboring residents and the City to see the processing plant that is now located east of Kingswood be moved to the east side of Hazel Dell Parkway. Without approval to mine for sand and gravel on the Mueller property, Martin Marietta will not be able to move the dredge which is located near the proposed site for the plant. This would mean that the firm will decide to mine the proposed processing plant site instead of relocating the plant from its current location. Further, the adoption of a mining ordinance is a process that will likely take six months to one year. This time frame would not allow for the movement of the plant as stated above. The Department and its consultant are confident that the special use application submitted are consistent with what will be required under the future ordinance as it relates to the mining of sand and gravel. The petitioner has submitted documents similar to those that would be required in any future ordinance, namely a mined land use plan and reclamation plan. B. Diminution of property values: There is no evidence to suggest that the surface mining operation proposed will have a negative effect on property values. It would be logical to conclude that a large natural area, such as the proposed lake, would actually increase property values and be an asset to the community. C. Need for buffer area and landscaping plan: May 22, 2002o2of4 Department Report Martin Marietta 5U-24-02, 5U-25-02, V-26-02, V-27-02, UV-28-02 The city's Urban Forester has been working on a bufferyard landscape plan with the petitioner and their consultant. This plan will provide a buffer that is, in many areas, greater in extent than would be required in the zoning ordinance. At the Department's request, the petitioner has included as part of the submitted mined land use plan a statement that Martin Marietta will prepare and carry out a landscape plan approved by the Department and Urban Forester within the 50 feet south of Kingswood and the 25 feet east of Carmelot Park, in accordance with the perimeter bufferyard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (Mined Land Use Plan, page 5). D. Opens the door for blasting operations: These applications in no way relate to or "pave the way for" blasting operations. Any proposal for underground mining would require an entirely separate application and approval. These petitions for surface mining should be judged based only on the uses proposed. E. Safety around the lake: Per the request of the city's consultant, the Hamilton County Soil & Water Conservation District, and the Hamilton County Surveyor, the petitioner has revised the proposed cross sections to provide a more gradual slope into the water and safety ledges around the water's edge. The petitioner will also install a black chain link fence and eight-foot tall buffer between the homeowners and the lake to provide greater safety and visual buffering. F. Hours of operation and timeline should be defined: The petitioner has committed to operate the dredge only between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. They further state in the mined land use plan that they will only remove overburden during daylight hours. They have provided a phasing plan with their application, which indicates an estimated 14-year operation. They have stated "once it has commenced sand and gravel extraction on the Mueller Property, no sand and gravel from any source other than Site will be processed through the Processing Plant until extraction on the Mueller property north of 106th Street is complete" (Mined Land Use Plan, page 3). G. Dust generated by the operation: The Department has visited the site several times while the plant is fully operational and has not found any evidence of significant dust pollution from the operations. Further, Martin Marietta has agreed to several provisions aimed to mitigate any dust impacts that could arise on the site. Those provisions are found on page 6 of the mined land use plan. May 22, 2002 30f4 Department Report Martin Marietta SU-24-02, SU-25-02, V-26-02, V-27-02, UV-28-02 H. Noise from the operations: Again, the Department has been to the site when it is fully operational and has determined that there is minimal noise impact from the sand and gravel operation. The relocation of the processing plant should eliminate virtually all of the noise from the current sand and gravel operation. In addition, the petitioner has agreed to several practices to minimize noise impacts. Those practices are found on page 6 and 7 of the mined land use plan. I. Truck traffic on nearby roads: This issue is unrelated to the petition before the Board. Martin Marietta requires their trucks' beds to be covered when loaded, and there has been no evidence presented that the trucks causing problems at nearby intersections are Martin Marietta vehicles. It would show unfair bias against the petitioner to consider this issue in deciding these petitions, as it is unrelated. J. Safety around Hazel Landing Park: This is one of the most salient issues related to the petition. The petitioner will be unable to install a fence around the proposed processing plant site due to its location in the floodway. The relocation of the plant moves the facility further away from the residential areas. The Department believes that the lake located north of the proposed plant site would be more attractive to children than the plant. This lake is surrounded on the east by a substantial wooded area, which would make it difficult for children to reach. K. Maintenance of water levels and water quality: The Carmel Utilities Director has been involved in the review of this petition from the date of its filing and has not found any substantial issues related to the proposed sand and gravel operation. He and the city's consultant who is studying the wells in this area will be present at the May 28 meeting to answer questions. May 22, 2002 4of4