4
To the Venango County Planning Commission
February 20, 2007
My name is Mark DeWalt and I am attending this meeting in regard to the new land developments proposed, and begun in Barkeyville Industrial Park, Barkeyville Borough. I became aware of one of the projects, a Hot Mix Asphalt plant to be built by Glen O. Hawbaker Inc, after reading an article published in the Franklin News Herald on January 5, 2007. The news release stated that the project’s future “is contingent upon receiving the required air permits and analyzing the legal details.” Since my home of over 30 years is located within one mile (as the smoke flies), of the Industrial park site, I became very interested in knowing more about the project.
After speaking with representatives from Venango Industrial Development Authority, the County Planning Commission, the Venango County Conservation District, and numerous staff at the regional office of the PA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), I finally found the officers in charge of reviewing the Air Quality Permit for the Hawbaker HMA project. The conversations with DEP and local officials reinforced my concerns about the size, scale and harmful environmental effects of this plant on our community. I then contacted friends, neighbors, and members of the community, and working together; we collected and analyzed hundreds of documents, reports, and data
that shed light on the proposed project. We have learned:
- This HMA plant is huge. It is approximately 8 times larger than the plants that many local people are familiar with. The capacity is to produce 560,000 tons of
asphalt each year.
- The plant will result in as much as 50,000 more trucks traveling on a small township road that is already extraordinarily dangerous where it intersects RT 8.
- The project will attempt to make the asphalt using coal as its primary fuel, subjecting the community to more than double the air emissions of more conventional fuels.
- The Air Emissions will be over 200 tons by the estimates provided to DEP in the Air Permit Application, including volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides,
carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, dust and fine particles, heavy metals, and an
unspecified list of other pollutants.
- Studies conducted around large asphalt plants in other parts of the country
have revealed dramatic increases in respiratory and other diseases for people who reside near such facilities. (In Barkeyville, there are 2 churches, 6 restaurants, 2 motels, a community park, and dozens of residences within one mile of the proposed plant.)
- Property values adjacent to, and nearby asphalt plants have been diminished by as much as 50%, thereby resulting in an actual erosion of the tax base. (In Barkeyville, the plant will be located in a Keystone Opportunity Zone, which eliminates local or county tax revenues from the plant, while contributing to a devaluation of surrounding property, and increases demand on the local infrastructure.)
- The increased truck traffic will add tons of diesel exhaust to the immediate area, which is not included in the Hawbaker plant emissions estimates. The resulting strain on the highway and transportation system becomes responsibility of the local governments.
How have we reacted? We attended the Barkeyville Borough Meeting on February 6 and requested that they consider joining our petition to the DEP wherein we requested:
1) an extension of the time to review the Air Quality permit and 2), that a public hearing be held to respond to the project. The Borough Council agreed by unanimous vote to make the requests of the DEP. Their signatures along over 90 others were forwarded to DEP. The DEP has granted the extension of time and will soon announce the time and location of a public hearing. We have studied the local ordinances. We feel that the decision to permit an asphalt plant of this type within the Borough is inconsistent with the language and intent of the zoning ordinance, and will pursue action to have it reviewed.
Why am I here? To put it simply, I believe that VCPC must continue their review process before issuing any approvals to the applicant (Glen O Hawbaker Inc.). What is my basis for this request? The Venango County Planning Commission Executive Summary lists 7 comprehensive goals, which in my opinion show great vision and commitment to the general welfare of the County’s residents and businesses. I will
quote the first three of the seven :
-To sustain the highest quality of rural, suburban, and urban life
for the residents of Venango County.
-To provide policies, plans and proposals to municipalities for the physical, economic and social development of their communities
while protecting the natural, historic, and built environments.
-To promote conditions providing for the health. safety, and
welfare of the citizens of Venango County.
On page 11 of the VCPC Land Use document, the title is: Guidelines for Traffic Studies. In paragraph 3, it states: “To assure that no major traffic generating developments are constructed without benefit of a traffic study, such studies shall be conducted for all developments of five or more acres or a thirty percent increase in building coverage, all commercial and industrial districts of any size.” The guidelines continue listing the following ‘STUDY REQUIREMENTS’:
Inventory
Traffic Flow Analysis
Trip Generation
Staged Development
Adjustment of Study Area
Impact Analysis
Site Access
Study Presentation
“Study Presentation
The completed traffic study shall be incorporated into a report containing such text, tabulations and graphic material as the developer deems necessary to describe the study effort and the findings and recommendations. The professional person(s) responsible for the content of the report shall be identified. The report shall be submitted at the time applications for approvals are filed, and the study team shall be available to present and defend the report at subsequent technical review meetings and formal hearings.
impact study review
Developers are advised that their impact studies will be reviewed by and for the Municipality for technical content and adequacy. The review findings will be presented at a formal hearing.”
The language of these guidelines is very clear that the scope of a Traffic Study is to be extensive. When I requested to review the Traffic Study, I was told that it was being conducted by the Oil Regional Alliance. John Phillips of the ORA reported to me that
no such study had been completed nor was it available for review.
In Conclusion:
I am not opposed to industry, growth, zoning, or change. I applaud the VCPC goals as stated in the executive summary. But based on that document and the alarming environmental and social issues that are associated with this type of development, I believe that it is premature for the VCPC to grant approval until after the DEP hearing on the air quality permit is held, traffic issues are fully addressed, and
the traffic study is made available for public review and comment.
Contact information: Mark DeWalt
814.786.7009 – home phone
814.758.0242 – mobile