By Joe Hart, Water expert David Monie testifies before the Middle Township Zoning Board May 15.

COURT HOUSE –– A professional planner, a former employee, two concerned neighbors, a volunteer fireman and a water expert testified in an ongoing Burleigh development application that saw no conclusion at the end of the four-hour hearing. The matter must continue for at least one more meeting.

Future Mining Inc., a subsidiary of Albrecht and Heun, wishes to construct a mining and recycling facility along with a retail store on a 253-acre tract of land off Indian Trail Road in Burleigh.

The company is currently before the Middle Township Zoning Board for site plan approval. The project was previously granted a use variance by the board and a mining license transfer by township committee.

The May 15 hearing marked the eighth time the board met to hear testimony in this site plan application, which began in April 2007.

Barbara Wooley-Dillon, a professional planner, testified for a group of objectors that includes Middle Township Tax Assessor Joe Ravitz, who owns property adjacent to the proposed development site.

The planner previously testified on behalf of another opposing party, the Friends of Indian Trail.
Wooley-Dillon said she believes the applicant’s original plans, submitted with the use variance application, are so different with those in the site plan application that board members were unaware of the scope of the project that they were approving.

Future Mining’s attorney Steve Nehmad said the conceptual plans weren’t even necessary.

“Isn’t it true that an applicant that comes before this board for a use variance is not required to submit a design plan?” Nehmad asked.

Wooley-Dillon conceded that was true.

Robert C. Hopkins, a former employee at Future Mining’s Goshen Road site, was the next to testify for the opposition.
In six months with the company as a heavy equipment operator, Hopkins said he saw and participated in numerous poor business and safety procedures at the site.

He said the workers routinely crushed contaminated materials including asbestos pipes, failed to water down dust on roads and equipment and didn’t wear goggles, hardhats or breathing apparatus. The company also knew when environmental inspectors would be arriving and would direct employees to give them material from the “clean” side of a pile, he said.

Hopkins noted that numerous trucks bypassed the vehicle scale leaving material unaccounted.

The applicant’s attorney objected to this testimony, but board Solicitor Victoria Steffan allowed it due to previous testimony from the applicant citing its safety precautions.

When asked if he ever complained to management about the work conditions or policies, Hopkins said he told his supervisor, who told him not to worry about it.

Nehmad painted Hopkins as a disgruntled employee who was bitter after being terminated by Future Mining and losing an unemployment claim with the company.

Lois and Ralph Shuman, who live next to the site and are members of the Friends of Indian Trail group, expressed concerns regarding potential noise, traffic, smells, loss of forested areas and impacts on the environment.

Mrs. Shuman also noted that Future Mining has claimed never to have violations from local or state agencies or complaints from neighbors at its current facility on Goshen Road yet she was able to find several of each.

Through the Open Public Records Act (OPRA), Mrs. Shuman found documents citing the company for pit depth and buffer infringement in the municipal clerk’s office.

She also discovered state violations for air pollutants and neighbor complaints for noise at the county Health Department.

Fernando Rodriguez, a volunteer firefighter who lives on Indian Trail Road, also testified.

Rodriguez told board members he fought a number of fires at the Goshen Road site over the years including a large blaze last year that required five fire companies to respond.

He said if mulch caught fire at the Indian Trail site the wooded nature of the surrounding area could put nearby homes in jeopardy.

When asked by Nehmad if fire were a possibility in any type of structure including single-family homes, Rodriguez agreed that anything could catch fire.

The applicant called only one expert at the May 15 meeting.

David Monie, president of a Cherry Hill water engineering firm, testified that the proposed project would not impact the quantity or quality of water in the surrounding area.

Throughout the year-long proceedings, numerous neighbors and advocates have expressed concerns over the water issue worried that wells would dry up or become contaminated.

Monie said he had soil borings done and found that the sandy soil at the site would not cause any problems with the wells.

The water expert said mining was not a significantly consumptive use because it does not remove water from the site.

When asked about deforestation, Monie contended that the removal of over 100 acres of trees would not reduce the water table.

As for water quality, Monie said he had never seen an adverse affect on water in the area of a sand and gravel pit. He did, however, recommend to the applicants to have quarterly water testing done at the site to ease the minds of concerned neighbors.

Due to the conditions at the site, Monie said there would also be no problem with saltwater intrusion, wetlands or leeching from the 77-acre unlined dump across the street from the site.

Testimony at the hearing was suspended at 10:55 p.m. It will reconvene at the July 10 regular zoning board meeting.

The board will hear its engineer’s report that night followed by public testimony and perhaps a vote on the application.

“If the zoning board approves this application, we plan and intend on appealing, we also plan on fighting at the state level,” a handout from the Friends of Indian Trail stated.

So even though the site plan application appears to be nearing an end, it seems the process is far from over.

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