By Dave Fidlin
Correspondent
In a stark juxtaposition of a recommendation handed down a week ago, the Waterford Town Board this week flatly denied a proposed gravel extraction operation that has been the source of controversy within the community.
Last week, the town Plan Commission largely favored a cursory review of a proposed mining operation at 33319 Hill Valley Road. While a formal vote was not tallied, commissioners attempted to offer the Town Board a 3-1 recommendation of moving forward with the project.
Because the proposal did not have a fourth “yes” from the seven-member appointed body, however, a formal vote was not recorded.
While revisiting the issue this week, the five-person Town Board on June 8 made a clear, decisive decision to deny the plans to offer brothers Dale and Greg Himebauch a conditional-use permit for the proposed mining operation at their property.
The board based its denial on 11 separate points, many of which were raised a week ago when nearby residents aired concerns about the plans to commissioners.
From an environmental and quality-of-life standpoint, the list of reasons behind the denial include the likelihood of increased truck traffic, the prospect of standing pond water from a nearby wetland and the ongoing presence of dust in the immediate area.
Other reasons behind the denial include the potential for nearby property values to decline and an assertion from town officials that the proposed mining site is not in keeping with the intended use for the property.
The recent debate over the mining site has been a case of déjà vu for long-time town residents.
Seventeen years ago, the Himebauchs came before the town with a similar request. A permit was initially issued in 1998, but the town reversed course in 2002 as the land sat idle and a litany of concerns — including noise, increased traffic and impact on the rural character of the area — were raised at the time.
Many of those same concerns bubbled back to the surface during the recent review. While there was some support at the recent Plan Commission meeting for the potential economic growth in the town, most of the recent speakers have opposed to the plans.
The 11 bullet points came at the recommendation of Town Attorney Michael Dubis, who reminded town officials of the 2002 suit the Himebauchs filed against the town.
“Whatever we say, we need to say it with specificity,” Dubis said.
With the Town Board’s swift denial of the conditional-use permit, there are no further plans to discuss the proposed revisiting of the mining site.
Had the board approved the permit, it would have been one in a series of lengthy steps before any construction work would have taken place.
-
-
-
-
-