Quarry expansion effort heads back to court January 23, 2008
Citzens Voice: The owner of a quarry in Dorrance Township took its case for expansion to a Luzerne County court Tuesday.
Pennsy Supply Inc., the owner of the Small Mountain Quarry, filed a 38-page brief requesting that the county’s Court of Common Pleas overturn a township zoning hearing board ruling and approve a proposal to expand and eventually relocate the quarry onto a 189-acre property on the south side of Small Mountain Road.
In the brief, Pennsy Supply contends there was no legal basis for the five-member zoning hearing board to unanimously deny the company’s application last July.
According to Patrick Bartorillo, the general manager of the quarry, the zoning hearing board denied the application because of reservations it had about a conveyor Pennsy Supply planned to build over Small Mountain Road.
The conveyor, which was intended to transport raw stone excavated from the south side of the road to crushing equipment on the north side, would have required a special exemption to the township’s zoning ordinances.
The rest of the proposal was compliant without the need for an exemption and should have been approved, Bartorillo said.
“This is our only recourse,” said Bartorillo.
Under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, the Court of Common Pleas has power to overrule the zoning hearing board, taking the final decision-making power out of the township on zoning and land use matters.
According to Article X-A, Section 1006-A of the code, “The court shall have power to declare any ordinance or map invalid and set aside or modify any action, decision or order of the governing body, agency or officer of the municipality brought up on appeal.”
Since the zoning board’s initial denial, Pennsy Supply has pursued its proposed quarry expansion on two fronts: in court, and with a revised proposal that is currently being considered by the Dorrance Township board of supervisors.
A board of supervisors hearing on the revised proposal began Dec. 18 and is scheduled to continue, after several postponements, on Jan. 31.
The revised proposal would eliminate the need for the conveyor by moving crushing equipment to the south side of the road.
The original proposal called for mining on approximately 128 acres of the 189-acre property. The revised proposal called for mining on 132.62 acres, according to Rick Caranfa, geologist and project management consultant hired by Pennsy Supply. In both cases, operations would expand westward incrementally over a projected 40-year life of the expanded quarry.
Under the original plan, the proposed excavation would be conducted 1,295 feet from the nearest home. In the revised proposal, the nearest residence would be located 1,100 feet from the mining zone and 1,500 feet from the grinding equipment used to process stones, Caranfa said.
Bartorillo said the company is pressing both plans because the current 60-acre quarry, which employs about 150 people, is expected to run out of usable stone within two years.
“We are taking the two-track approach because the project is really important to us and time is of the essence,” said Bartorillo. “We can’t wait and sit on our hands, so to speak, and wait for the outcome.”
William Higgs, an attorney who represents opponents of the expansion, said he would file a response to the brief. George Asimos, the attorney for Pennsy Supply, did not return a call for comment.
