COURT HOUSE –– Patience is a virtue.

After an entire year and at the seventh four-hour-long hearing, representatives from several conservation agencies were able to take their turns at the podium to express concerns regarding an industrial development project planned in Middle Township.

Parties heard from at the April 10 township zoning board meeting included the American Littoral Society, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New Jersey Audubon Society and the Sierra Club.

The board was continuing a hearing on the site plan application from Future Mining and Recycling Inc. to build a 100-acre mining operation and a class-B recycling center on a 253-acre tract of forested land off Indian Trail Road in Burleigh.

The board began hearings on the site plan application in April of last year.

Prior to the site plan application, the company – a subsidiary of Albrecht and Heun – was granted a mining license transfer for the proposed site from its current operation on Goshen Road by the township governing body and also received a use variance from the zoning board after a lengthy challenge.

Over this past year, the mining company has produced officers, planners, engineers and environmental experts testifying that Future Mining is a good neighbor, that the Indian Trail site is well-suited for the proposed uses, and that the operations would not have any negative impacts on the surrounding neighbors or environment.

In his environmental impact statement, Future Mining’s environmental expert, Michael Logan, addressed the impacts associated with the proposed uses on the site compared with the potential impacts of approved uses in the site’s zoning district. He concluded that the impacts from mining and recycling were minor compared with other uses such as shopping or distribution centers, which would be allowed at the site.

Future Mining’s attorney Steve Nehmad noted that the company would be able to construct any of those approved uses on the site “by right” without requesting a use variance from the zoning board.

Throughout the hearings, groups of between 50 and 100 nearby residents and representatives from conservation groups have questioned the applicant’s witnesses contending that the project would indeed have negative impacts, including: traffic congestion, noise and air pollution, property devaluation, loss of wooded land for recreation and wildlife as well as possible contamination of ground water supplies.

Attorneys for the applicant as well as the opposition agreed to go out of turn and take the conservationists’ testimony to avoid having them return for yet another meeting next month. The conservationists had been regular attendees to the marathon hearings and took advantage of their opportunity to finally speak.

“The Littoral Society opposes the proposed mining operation and industrial recycling facility along Indian Trail Road,” said Matt Blake, a program manager with the group, which focuses on coastal conservation issues. “It is a project that is completely incompatible with an established neighborhood, a federal Wildlife Refuge and natural resources of international importance.”

Blake cited the area’s numerous designations for its environmental importance and relayed his opinion that the proposed uses would damage its fragile ecology.

“The proposed uses are not environmentally clean industries – just because they may operate within allowable state thresholds for noise, dust and air contaminants – doesn’t mean for a second that there won’t be adverse impacts to public health, quality of life, water resources and the environment.”

Cape May National Wildlife Manager Howard Schlegel was the next to speak.
Schlegel noted that, as a Division of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the refuge holds land in the public trust and has a responsibility to protect it from potential adverse impacts. He said the proposed site is of such significance that it actually lies within the refuge’s acquisition boundary.

“The refuge does not and has not taken a position for or against this project in these proceedings,” he noted.

“But it is legitimately participating in these municipal proceedings, as a landowner and interested member of this community, to ensure the refuge’s concerns are heard, and that the board has sufficient information to make an informed and reasoned decision.”

Schlegel’s main concerns were with the inadequacy of the applicant’s environmental assessment, which he said did not identify natural existing habitats or list potential impacts from the proposed uses on those habitats, he said.

“The refuge expresses its reservation over moving forward with such a project absent more reliable and extensive examination of the potential impacts associated with the current proposal,” he said.

Schlegel noted that he met with the applicant last month to discuss his concerns and intends to continue to work with the applicant and the board as the application process continues.

Christina Frank, an Important Bird and Birding Area Coordinator with the New Jersey Audubon Society, focused her comments on the Indian Trail Swamp Important Bird Area and its ability to provide essential habitat for many bird species.

According to Frank, birds found in this area include the state-threatened barred owl, numerous migratory birds and between 40 and 60 varieties of raptors such as bald eagles, red-tailed hawks and turkey vultures.

Vilma Pombo, of Swainton, spoke as a member of the Sierra Club’s Cape May County Conservation Committee.

“We believe this project goes against the municipal land use law, which provides that proposed uses be in harmony with the appropriate land use district, be free of nuisance characteristics as well as not be detrimental to adjacent properties,” she said.

Pombo also noted the detrimental effects that could come with clear-cutting over 100 acres of trees. Trees generate oxygen, aid in pollution control, filter water and prevent soil erosion, she said.

Pombo’s group advocates that the site be used for open space and aquifer recharge.
Former county agricultural agent Larry Newbold also testified regarding the potential impacts to the watershed.

He cited a water supply report from the U.S. Geological Survey that identifies the “axis of the peninsula” as the area of the county that “would likely provide freshwater for the longest period of time.”

“This proposed mining site lies right along that axis,” Newbold said.

Prior to the conservationists’ testimony, J. Mark Nielsen testified on behalf of the Friends of Indian Trail, a group of concerned neighbors that object to Future Mining’s proposed operation.

Nielsen, of the environmental consulting firm, Environ, also attacked the applicant’s environmental impact statement describing it as “generally inadequate in demonstrating that the proposed facility will not adversely impact on natural resources.”

“In the hopes of concluding this matter,” zoning board Chairman James McLaughlin said the board would hold a special meeting on May 15. At that hearing, another opposing party is expected to call professional planner Barbara Wooley-Dillon. Carole Mattessich represents her husband Joseph Ravitz, who owns property adjacent to the proposed site.

Wooley-Dillon had previously testified on behalf of the Friends of Indian Trail and there had been some confusion as to whether the board would allow Mattessich to question the witness due to an identity of interests with the other objectors.

Mattessich noted that Wooley-Dillon was already well-versed in this application and having to hire a new planner would substantially prolong the process.

In the end, Nehmad said he would withdraw his objections to the questioning in the interest of a timely conclusion to the application.

Contact Hart at (609) 886-8600 Ext 35 or at: jhart@cmcherald.com