Pocono Residents Initiative

 
  Present:  
 

www.noconcreteplant.com

 
     
   
   
   
 

Just Say NO!

To The Concrete Plant

 

 

 

Hot Links

The People vs The Concrete Plant

The Batch Plant

The Forum

What's Next?

 

 

To A Concrete Plant In Our Neighborhood!

 
 

 
 

THE PEOPLE vs THE CONCRETE PLANT

 
     
 

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE,

IMPORTANT NOTICE: DECEMBER 20, 2011

THE HYK MATTER HAS BEEN PUT OFF UNTIL MARCH OF 2012. ATTORNEYS FOR THE TOWN AND THE APPLICANT HAVE AGREED TO CONTINUE STOPPAGE OF THE “CLOCK” IN THE HEARINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE UNTIL THIS SPRING. AS WE CLOSE ON THAT DATE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WILL BE ANNOUNCING THE RESUMPTION OF HEARINGS TO ALL PARTIES IN THE CASE.

PLEASE READ BELOW.

 
 
     
 

ARE WE THERE YET, DADDY?

 
     

Things have gotten a wee bit mushy in the HYK concrete plant matter. Where last time we discussed the fact that the PA Supreme Court had refused the appeal of the construction giant and sent the whole thing back to the Board of Supervisors in Smithfield Township for hearings, and in addition had allowed the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) and all other parties to rejoin the process, there again have arisen various rumblings over whether or not a “settlement” might be in the works.



Such a settlement, we hear from reliable sources, might involve placing a “temporary” (meaning portable?) batching plant within the boundaries of the Haines & Kibblehouse Quarry Operations site in Marshalls Creek, thereby supposedly freeing the proposed original site adjacent to the East Stroudsburg Regional Airport from development. If that is to be the case, then such a move would require some zoning changes in the region of the quarry where at present only retail businesses are permitted, sources say.



This raises two important questions: First is the issue of the manufacture (of concrete) being allowed in a consumer-retail zone. Of course it’s a stretch to believe that the current mining and crushing of thousands of cubic yards of aggregate stone is somehow a retail enterprise, especially when it is being carried out by a “Quarry Operations” company. The second issue is whether or not zoning changes could or would be restricted to just that one instance in just that one location. It is our experience that allowing minor concessions such as these could spread like a virus to other areas in the zone. Letting Mr. Haines and Co. in the door, so to speak, might also give others of similar bent the idea that they could do the same.



However, there would be immediate advantages for both sides in a settlement of this nature. We would benefit from having the noise, dust and disturbances of a concrete operation removed from consideration on a wetland next to our homes and the vulnerable aircraft-related businesses opposite the proposed site on the Hamlin property. And of course HYK would be able to sell their concrete to the contractors involved in building the Marshalls Creek bypass. But, remember, there are always unintended consequences to any remodeling of the law.



The Smithfield Board of Supervisors will, they say, contact all parties if and when they are approached to modify the Zoning Ordinances for such an eventuality. Presumably there would have to be hearings over any proposed modifications.



THIS THING IS NOT OVER. AND REMEMBER, IT’S YOUR TOWN. WATCH THIS SPACE FOR NEWS; STAY UP ON NOTICES IN THE PAPER. WRITE OR EMAIL YOUR SUPERVISORS. GET INVOLVED!

 

Happy Holidays,



--The Editor