Story - The Meade County Messenger


Vol. 116, No. 35	Month DAY, 2007

Thumbs down
County PZ says no to quarry

By SANDRA STONE
Messenger Staff

A large crowd filled the Meade County Courthouse Aug. 21 for the public hearing regarding a rezoning request by Meade County Quarry, LLC, for the purpose of opening a surface mine in the Big Bend area of Meade County. The current zoning is A2/agricultural, which allows for rock extraction. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to HI/heavy industrial so a crusher can be located on the site.

Photo by Sandra Stone
Before a full house at Meade County Planning and Zoning, resident Debbie Burnett displayed photos of the effects of mining on the land and of mine reclamation projects which have not come to fruition.

The proposed quarry would be located essentially dead center of four other quarries in the area – Hilltop Big Bend Quarry, Battletown Quarry, Wolf Creek Quarry and Mulzer Crushed Stone Quarry in Indiana.

According to Meade County Quarry principal Scott Ely, there’s a reason four mines are located within a few miles of each other. “These are some of the hardest seams of rock in the world,” he said. “This is unique stone, both for the soundness and abrasion.” The rock, he said, is useful for construction purposes and as scrubber stone to clean the air at power plants. “It’s a valuable resource.”

In presenting the quarry’s plans, Ely stated the quarry would have a positive economic impact on the community, creating 25 or more jobs with an annual payroll between $750,000 and $1 million. He also stated there would be approximately $4.5 million in equipment and contract services which would have an impact on local businesses.

Ely addressed the public’s concerns, which included the following:
• Permits. The permitting process is extensive with constant cross checks across local, state and federal lines. “If you intend to harm the environment, you couldn’t,” said Ely, eliciting a dissenting murmur from the crowd.
• Environmental impact. Ely said they were working with Kentucky Fish and Wildlife to select vegetation and reclamation that promotes no impact on wildlife.
• Blasting (noise and dust). Pre blasting surveys will be conducted for immediate neighbors. The quarry, he said, will embrace minimum thresholds and design for maximum distance. Additionally, there will be constant monitoring (Saul’s Seismic) of blasting. Berms and white pine trees will help mitigate noise and dust.
• Traffic. The product will be sold by the river, reducing the truck traffic, noise and dust.
• Reclamation plans. The post mining designation will be forest land, recreational and residential.

Preliminary plans include a marina and the preservation of upland areas for estate homes (low-density residential development). “Our goal is always to reclaim the land responsibly,” said Ely.

Ely further stated Meade County Quarry plans to be a good neighbor to the county. They will offer a quarterly citizens advisory group meeting to keep the community informed and involved and participate in other community outreach. “Our goal is to have a positive economic impact on the county and the commonwealth,” he said.

Bob Griffith, attorney for Meade County Quarry, LLC, said the proposed plan is in accordance with both the comprehensive plan and in line with the criteria by which the commission must evaluate rezoning requests.

Ely concurred. “Both from an engineering and a legal perspective,” he said, “all three criteria apply to our request.”

The open session began with David Bell, spokesman for the residents opposing the rezoning, reading a prepared statement after making a few comments about the presentation. He said it seemed some of the wording of the KRS 100 had been deleted, changing the context. He also noted the vague comments that give the quarry a way out.

“This is a very preliminary stage,” replied Ely. “We have no idea what we will be permitted to do.” Ely was then asked to hold his comments until the public comments had ended.

“It was zoned agricultural, and that use is appropriate for that land,” said Bell.

In Bell’s prepared statement, he said Meade County has a unique opportunity to develop with a conscience. He asked the commission to exercise foresight and responsibility and to not be blinded by dollar signs.

The day before the hearing, Bell submitted to Meade County Planning and Zoning a petition opposing the rezoning. The petition had 110 signatures, and Bell said he had collected seven more the evening of the hearing. The petition read, in part:

“We feel compelled to express our opposition not only to the proposed limestone quarry, but to the zoning changes which would make that operation at 2595 Big Bend Road legal and possible. The spectrum of reasons for our opposition spans: air and water quality to future land use; the sanctity of our homes, neighborhoods, and ways of life; to biodiversity and responsible land use. We oppose any changes in zoning which would allow this enterprise to go forward.”

Following Bell’s comments, other residents had the opportunity to speak. The majority of those addressing the commission were opposed to the rezoning and many expressed similar concerns:
• Beep, beep, beep. All day, all night, all the time.
• The dust generated from the blasting and the potential for respiratory health issues.
• Damage to homes, wells, cisterns and other structures.
• Degradation of the land by surface mining.
• The lack of reclamation at other mining sites and the belief it would be the same in Big Bend.
• The need to preserve green spaces and agricultural areas.
Several themes also emerged among those who spoke in favor of the quarry:
• The generation of jobs for Meade Countians.
• The economic benefit of providing a valuable resource to the marketplace.
• The family tradition of mining.

When the floor was returned to him for rebuttal, Ely acknowledged there were many concerns and the quarry is an emotional issue. “It’s a matter of trust in working with a new company,” he said. “The only way to address issues is to take them one by one by one. That happens over time.”

He also noted restrictive covenants and reclamation plans will ensure the quarry owners will do what they say they will do. These would travel with the deed, so future owners would be bound by the same requirements.

In considering all they had heard, the commissioners broke the criteria down and voted on each separate element:
• The map amendment is in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The vote was 5-2 against with Sonja Redmon and Mark Garverich stating they felt the map amendment was in agreement with the comprehensive plan.
• Existing zoning is appropriate. All commissioners agreed the agricultural zone is appropriate.
• Major changes of an economic, physical or social nature in the area. The vote was once again split with Garverich and Redmon voting yes.

With the polling complete, commission chair Allen Flaherty moved to recommend denial of the rezoning request. Commissioner Paul Cibolski seconded the motion. The motion passed with Flaherty, Cibolski, Wardrip, Lawrence Sechrist and Mildred Brown voting yes; Redmon and Garverich voting no.

The commission’s recommendation will go to Fiscal Court Sept. 9 for approval.

Click Here to Go Back