Residents opposing project mull options going forward
By Gwendolyn Craig
Despite thousands of public comments against a granite mining project on White Lake in Forestport, a town in northern Oneida County, the Adirondack Park Agency unanimously approved it Friday while adding more conditions to the times certain operations could occur.
This was the first major project before new APA Chair John Ernst, who conducted a rare two-day meeting to go over the public’s concerns. The decision to approve the project disappointed environmental organizations urging the agency to schedule the project for a public hearing.
The Adirondack White Lake Association, an opponent to the project, plans to meet to discuss its options.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
“We don’t plan on rolling over and playing dead if the board is not prepared to do its job protecting the environment,” said Frank Cossa, husband of the association’s president Louanne Cossa.
The project by Red Rock Quarry Associates involves extracting granite for dimensional stone from about 9 acres in the area of Stone Quarry Road, with the White Lake Outlet at the southern edge.
The existing mine is owned by Thomas Sunderlin Jr. The area was last mined in the 1930s, where its granite was used for iconic buildings and monuments including the Proctor Memorial in Utica and the Bailey Fountain in Brooklyn, records show. The renewed quarry is expected to employ between three and five people with an overall payroll between $170,000 and $360,000 depending on market conditions, according to the APA.
The state Department of Environmental Conservation also has oversight of the project, and it coordinated its permit review with the APA, an unusual process that has not often been done, which board members noted was termed helpful for addressing concerns and comments from the public.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
The Town of Forestport Planning Board tabled its review until the APA made its final decision. The town still needs to approve the quarry as a commercial use under its site review law.
Devan Korn, an environmental program specialist for the APA, said the agency received more than 300 comments during the official comment period. The agency also received more than 1,400 form letters against the project and more than 1,400 petition signatures.
The Adirondack White Lake Association hired the LA Group, an engineering firm, to review the application and provide recommendations. The association and Protect the Adirondacks hired Pace Environmental Litigation Clinic of White Plains. Both the LA Group and the litigation clinic discovered flaws in the application and called on the APA to hold a public hearing.
For it to disapprove an application, the APA board must send a project to a hearing presided by a judge. The board hasn’t sent a project to an adjudicatory hearing in about a decade, drawing sharp criticism from groups including Protect the Adirondacks and Adirondack Wild: Friends of the Forest Preserve.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
David Gibson, managing partner of Adirondack Wild: Friends of the Forest Preserve said the APA has substituted findings of fact with a yes/no permit form.
“Since 2020, no impacts are ever identified in the major permits you have issued,” Gibson said. “When project impacts and findings are kept hidden in a permit, that is not good government transparency.”
State Sen. Joseph Griffo, R-Rome, wrote to the APA that “concerns need to be addressed before a project can move forward.”
Residents registered concerns about noise, dust pollution and traffic. Many worried about the water-quality of White Lake and their drinking water wells.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
Korn said Red Rock Quarry Associates will not drill below the water table, and thus water-quality would not be impacted. Under the DEC’s permit, the mining operator must monitor the water table levels and submit reports monthly for two years to the DEC. The DEC also requires seismograph monitoring to measure the force of the mining blasts.
No water table tests or sound studies were done for the APA’s permit, although staff toured the site. The nearest home is 570 feet, and Korn said that distance is buffered by trees and a ridge of bedrock. He suggested the noise from the mining operation would be minimal for those living nearby. A sound assessment was part of the DEC’s permit, which listed noise levels for different mining activities. That assessment noted project activities’ noise levels would be equivalent to a normal conversation or background music for most residences in the area.
Conditions in place
APA staff put conditions on the five-year mine operating permit. Mineral extraction will occur from April 1 to Oct. 31, except for major holidays. There are limits to the blasting charge intensity and no more than 20 truck trips per day.
Board members spent over an hour discussing the hours of operation for blasting, drilling and crushing. Kisha Santiago-Martinez, representative on the APA board for the state Department of State, said she would prefer the hours of operation started later in the morning. Board member Art Lussi also wanted later and fewer hours to accommodate second-home owners and tourists.
Crushing activities were originally slated to begin as early as 7 a.m. and end as late as 6 p.m. By Friday’s meeting, the APA tightened that to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Adirondack White Lake Association member Deborah Dempsey addressed the board during the virtual public comment portion following the board’s vote. Though her face was not visible, she sounded as though she was holding back tears. She called the staff’s presentation biased and lacking information on the potential noise and water-quality impacts.
She said the board validated her belief that it did not have enough information to make a decision because members changed the crushing hours of operation despite staff’s opinion that the noise would not be disruptive. Dempsey also worried about the water table and surrounding wells and did not feel the DEC’s monthly tests were enough.
“The wait-and-see approach stands to destroy what so many have worked hard to obtain,” Dempsey said. She asked the agency to reverse its decision.
Louanne Cossa told the board that she was disappointed that no hydrology or noise studies were done. “Now for the next five years we have to monitor, because who is really going to monitor?” she said.
Board members mostly praised their decision during the member comment. Ken Lynch and Lussi commended staff for addressing all the public comments.
Dan Wilt, chair of the regulatory programs committee that first passed the project, said it was a challenging review. “But we need to follow the law,” Wilt said. “I think the important topics were covered. I’m sorry there’s some misconceptions on how some of the things were done. I really think staff and Devan (Korn) did the best job that could be done.”
“I do think there are matters of fact and then issues of the heart,” Santiago-Martinez said. “I’m glad we applied some conditions that are more matters of the heart.”
APA board member Andrea Hogan was absent.
This story has been updated to clarify that a sound assessment was done for the DEC’s permit.
Boreas says
Another ‘determine the impact AFTER the fact’ application granted – although the findings likely wouldn’t matter. Glad I don’t live nearby. Sorry for those that do.
Lydia says
I once lived in a town with 2 quarries, I moved to the Adks for the quiet and beauty of the region. The sound from the quarry in my old town was heard during operating hours 5 days a week all day long. Trucks coming and going use “jake” sp? brakes to add to the sound and trucks also accidentally spread gravel on the highway. From my experience I can say get ready for noise, dusty roads, rocks in your windshield and long lines of traffic behind those trucks in the summer.
The problems are not just confined to the quarry.
JB says
We all knew, in our heart of hearts, that today would come and go, and it would be “business as usual” for the APA. But a shudder just rippled through a good contingent of Adirondack landowners, not just in White Lake. How very far things have slipped away in the past couple of decades. Priorities and procedures are totally backwards. What will the next year bring?
Stoneman says
I wonder why DEC/APA did not require the applicant to conduct a noise impact study. Seems like that was a fair request by the public.
Jim says
You can’t do a noise impact study, unless you have noise. You can’t study something that doesn’t exist.
Dana says
Extrapolation from similar mines into the test vicinity. Not rocket science. How else does one do an impact study PRIOR to a project??
Todd Eastman says
I see no mention of an Industrial Stormwater Permit…
… water quality is always an issue…
Boreas says
The APA is becoming comfortable as a rubber-stamp agency. Disgraceful.
Todd Eastman says
APA = All Proposals Approved…
Mark says
The Adirondack White Lake Association does not have jurisdiction over a region wide decision over a project they deem as harmful to their property within a private association.
In the past they have engaged to implement restrictions on right of ways to white lake. Their cries for protection on this quarry project is one more example.
louane says
Mark, The last time I checked the Adirondack Park Agency governs all of the ADK park – private and public lands. Private land owners within the park have to follow certain guidelines; so should a proposed mine which will most likely operate for 25 years in what is now a tourist/residential community. All we wanted were assurances this project would not harm our aquifer and spring fed lake or create intolerable noise levels 6 days per week disturbing both residents and wildlife. The Adirondack White Lake Association was/is not the only property owners concerned about the impact of the proposed mine. We just helped to coordinate the effort seeking answers to our questions and concerns for all peoples in the area. We never had the opportunity for an Adjudicatory Hearing which would have had experts and staff questioned under oath by a neutral third party, even though we met the criteria for such a hearing. If the mine was in your back yard, you would be concerned too.
Ryan McHugh says
I am trying to better understand the concerns raised by many of the readers regarding the APA and the public. Since 08 when the APA began rubber stamping proposals sans public hearings – can you give me some examples of projects in the Park that have gone ahead and continue to cause significant concern to the neighbors and local communities nearby? I’d like to look into these in more detail.
Boreas says
Ryan,
The time frame you mention also entails superficial or non-existent impact studies for larger projects. These studies need to be done first, then the public should be informed of the studies and given the opportunity to comment. I agree, until the public has a chance to ruminate on the potential impacts of a particular project, there isn’t much need for public input that will simply be ignored.
JB says
From DEC’s website, some of the letters of concern submitted prior to the public comment hearing: https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/permits_ej_operations_pdf/whitelkgraniteapareq60821.pdf
As per Boreas, there are scant to none impact studies (a priori or a posteriori) for recent projects. Indeed, “impact studies” cannot properly quantify the types of protections spelled out in Article 27 (APA Act). The entire goal of the entire endeavor has always been to prevent the inevitable incremental harms of unrestricted development. When looking at the entire Park over time, there will never be single project (hopefully) that we can point to and say: “This is the one that finally violated ‘wilderness character’.” That is what makes it so paramount that the APA be beyond reproach when it comes to upholding Art. 27.
Sadieann Spear says
It’s disturbing that the APA refused an adjudicatory hearing. That would have been an intelligent, fair and responsible option.
Anthony B says
I’m glad to see the quarry get approved. Nothing like local products made locally and some jobs for people who want to work!