Rochester Quarry Hearing
Attracts a Crowd
By Martha Slater

About 70 people crowded into the Rochester Office on the morning of Monday, July 30 for the continuation of an Act 250 hearing on a Waitsfield company’s proposal to re-open an existing gravel pit on Route 100 in Rochester. The previous hearing took place February 13, with about the same number of people in attendance.

Monday’s meeting was chaired by District 3 Environmental Commissioner Joshua Powers and overseen by Bill Burke, the Act 250 coordinator assigned to the project.

The proposal, which has attracted opposition from a large and vocal group of area residents, would include quarry and aggregate processing from approximately 8.75 acres of a 192-acre parcel of land located on Route 100, south of Jerusalem Hill Rd.

The company planning to operate the facility, Rochester Sand & Gravel, LLC, headquartered at the Kingsbury Construction offices in Waitsfield, has a lease agreement with the landowners, brothers Mike Bowen and Ethan Bowen of Rochester. Access to the facility would be via an existing driveway on Route 100.

Rochester resident Jeff Sherwin of Kingsbury Construction, is the project manager overseeing the operation.

Project engineer Mark Bannon of Bannon Engineering in Randolph gave an overview of the project, noting that the proposed quarry was anticipated to load an average of 20 trucks per day, which equals 40 round trips per day. He said "this estimate is optimistic and will likely not occur on a daily basis. It is anticipated that on many days, no trucks will be loaded."

Bannon also reiterated the project information outlined in the initial application, stating that, "operation of the quarry, that is, drilling, blasting, crushing and processing of aggregates will occur from May 15-Oct. 1, from 8 a.m.-4 p.m., Monday through Friday, with the Memorial Day, July 4 and Labor Day holidays excluded. The transporting and loading of aggregate materials from the quarry may take place during the entire year on weekdays, from 7 a.m.-4 p.m."

The site would include a construction trailer, storage shed, portable rock crusher, and other related utilities. No site lighting is proposed.

During the hearing process, the Act 250 commission is looking at criteria including: 1) air pollution 1b) waste disposal and stormwater treatment, 3) impact on water supplies, 4) soil erosion, 5) traffic safety, 8) aesthetics including noise and visual impact; 9e) is extraction of earth resources (blasting), 9k) public investments (the impact on Route 100) and 10) conformation to the town plan. Over 30 people opposing the project have been granted party status on one or more of those criteria.

Those who spoke throughout the day included representatives of the quarry owners and 10-15 people representing a cross section of opponents to the project. Experts in various areas such as noise pollution, hydro-geology, aesthetics, and planning gave testimony.

Dean Mendell, an abutting property owner, who also owns two buildings in Rochester village on Route 100, presented an exhibit showing results of a traffic study which he said was performed by Two Rivers Ottauquechee Planning Commission. He also submitted information about the location of various residential wells in the area of the quarry, and voiced his concerns about noise and air pollution.

"To develop a quarry in the center of a neighborhood is disruptive and unhealthy," Mendell said.

Bannon noted that dust would be controlled by the wet suppression method, which applies a mist of water over the surface of the ground. He also said that diesel trucks and a diesel crusher would be used. Asked about the presence of cristalline silica, Bannon said that no tests had been done to determine the mineral content of the rock at the site.

Another abutting landowner, Bill Gibson, organized a petition effort stating its signers’ opposition to the opening of a mine operation when he initially learned of the project last year, and was also instrumental in forming a group called Friends of Route 100 to oppose the project.

At Monday’s hearing, Gibson submitted photographs having to do with the issue of whether the sight distances for trucks were sufficient or not.

Carol Holt, representing the Friends of Route 100, spoke on their behalf.

Representatives for the Bowens testified that they felt there would be no undue effects on the town, under the Act 250 guidelines.

The hearing lasted until after 4 p.m. Burke told The Herald later that the commission will issue a second recess order, most likely by next week, which will require the submission of additional information from both the applicant and certain opponents to the project. The order will contain various deadlines for submission of this information and an opportunity for rebuttal.

Burke also said it was "uncertain at this time whether there will be a third hearing, or if the commission will close the record and issue a decision."