2016-02-04 Hearing Transcript - Arrow SPP 09-076 & Rodrigues SPP 15-178

Home

come up with a plan, but when should that plan be implemented? When should those slopes be restored? That’s something that we propose in our conditions. Same thing with moisture compaction testing which is not a part of the current proposed conditions. Guardrails. We heard testimony from an engineer saying well, a hog wire fence may be a barrier, but that’s not something that we want to have liability for. So, who should that liability be imposed on? We heard in Exceptions from the Rodrigues that geez, if we put guardrails in, it’s going to destabilize the slope there. Doesn’t that tell you that we have an unstable cinder situation? If you do not have guardrails where you have insufficient setbacks, now you have a real safety hazard that’s been acknowledged on the record. Improved driveway entrances to commercial driveway standards as has been recommended by the engineer. These roads are not built to withstand heavy vehicle traffic. This has been agreed to on the record and yet we’re placing these quarrying operations with the heavy truck traffic that occurs there at these sites. Erosion control along road edges and swales. The objection from Rodrigues is well, there’s water going over the slopes that they’ve created. If you take a look at, even assuming that Chapter 10 applies, Section 10-25(a), adequate provisions shall be made to prevent surface waters from damaging the cut face of an excavation. So, if we’re dealing with erosion control, that should be properly designed and engineered to avoid damage to both the road and to avoid erosion to these cut slopes. Limit access to certain locations. Arrow has agreed just to take access on Liliana. That’s not part of the condition that’s been proposed. We can see what happens when you allow accesses in different locations. Next condition, improve intersection locations where this wear and tear is known to exist. Next condition, repair road sections abutting quarrying operations where the roads have been destabilized by heavy traffic or cut slopes. Arrow agreed that this was a reasonable condition. Survey and staking is another condition. How do you determine setback locations in the absence of survey and staking? Oversight and periodic review. Why is that so important? Because we have in this situation, two applicants. One is Arrow that violated the Special Permit it was already issued. It undertook to engage in operations of other properties knowing that it needed a Special Permit in the first place. Rodrigues had grading permits from some parcels but not on others. So, when we ask for oversight, we’re saying at least at a minimum within a certain period of time, require reporting. Require these annual progress reports and even at a 5-year period, have a hearing and see where these Applicants are. We have such a safety risk for roads that it is something that is mandated. 15 EXHIBIT D