The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About003-06 O-N Minerals (Chemstone) - 639.13 Acres RA to EM - Back Creek - BackfilePOSTAL CUSTOMER Nonprofit Org. April 2oo8 GETINVOLVER, The Frederick Sentinel Is this the Future of Southern Frederick County? 1ll ' Huai] Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 rshickle@shentel.net (h)540-667-2264 r Back Creek: Gary Lofton 540-869-1972 gary@garylofton.org Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove 540-662-2734 garydove4@comcast.net Opequon: Bill M. Ewing 540-869-5058 supervisorewing@yahoo.com Shawnee: Gene E. Fisher (h)540-662-5238 gfisher@visuallink.com (w)540-665-4938 Stonewall: Charles DeHaven 540-662-7421 cdehaven@crosslink.net Red Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-722-3673 plemieux@visuallink.com Planning Commissioners Speak Out "Fundamentally, as a land -use issue, the time for the expansion of this quarry and the industrial use of these particular properties is frankly passed. " — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Christopher Mohn, June 7, 2006 'I know of absolutely nothing - I can conceive of nothing -,that can be proffered that would make this an acceptable rezoning for me. ►► — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Robert Morris, June 7, 2006 "When you have that many questions, and that many concerns, it would seem to belie that there is something not quite right about' this. This is, a square peg trying to be, jammed. into a round hole." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Rick C. Ours, June 7, 2006 I am writing to object to the request by O-N Minerals to rezone a huge tract of land near Middletown for an industrial mining corridor. This project, next to three of the greatest assets our county has to offer - Cedar Creek, the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park and historic Middletown - and nearby homes and farms, is too big. And O-N Minerals has never offered to scale back their plan despite appeals from local groups and coun- ty staff for nearly three years. Fr understand the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) supports the rezoning in order to use the quarry pits to store water after mining has ceased. I don't believe we should sacrifice Middletown's unique quality of life for this rezoning, when the FCSA could store water at the Strasburg quarry next door. Please vote no on the O-N Minerals mining rezoning request. Sincerely yours, 1:\(i111V W t llltll \/a47 YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK i ❑ Enclosed is my $50 tax-deductible* gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick County. ❑ Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the Frederick County Sentinel. ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. i E-mail address: i Name: Street Address/PO Box: i i City/State/Zip: i Telephone Number: (Home/Work) (Cell) Please make check payable to: Preserve Frederick, P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 I Contact us at: preservefrederick@yahoo.com i , * Preserve Frederick is recognized by the IRS as anon -profit charitable organization. Gifts are tax deductible as allowed by law. i i L-----------------------------------------------------------------------------J dF!!�Vl THE FREDERICK COUNTY U.S. Postage PAI D Winchester, VA II Permit No. 102 TJ IL ECRWSS � 31111 PUBLISHED r n U SHED BY PRESERVE FREDERICK April 2008 WE INFORM — YOU DECIDE Massive Mining Corridor Proposed Around Middletown O-N Land at Cedar Creek - -I Proposed Mining ti - - Corridor N Proposed Rezoning Current Mining Operation " National Park 0 0.s Proposed Industrial Mining Corridor Alternative Plan The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is paying for the O-N Rejeete �7 Minerals rezoning application for expanded mining near Middletown. The CG agency agreed to do so when it signed an agreement in 2000 to acquire the com- pany's quarry pits for water storage after mining operations cease. This agree - The Frederick County Planning ment between the FCSA and O-N Minerals raises a host of Uoubling questions. Commission voted 8 to 4 to reject Why does the FCSA need three new quarry, pits from the rezoning, when it the mining rezoning request in June, could simply use the existing quarry pit at Strasburg to store water? At a com- 2006. After waiting for action for munity meeting in Middletown April 2, O-N Minerals General Manager more than a year. Preserve Frederick Spencer C. Stinson said the Strasburg quarry holds "a billion gallons of water." sent O-N Minerals an alternative Must Southern Frederick residents accept a vast new mining corridor to , mining plan. complete a water plan created by a private agency, with no public comment The alternative plan provided for or support? The FCSA water plan, the lease agreement with O-N Minerals expanded mining on a smaller scale and the rezoning for expanded mining were not debated in 2000. Area res- in an area already greatly affected by idents were not given a chance to discuss the wisdom of expanded mining the existing mine operations. Other near a national park and historic town in return for public water storage, a measures would have protected nat- need that could be better met by other options. ural and historic resources, diverted Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such truck traffic and addressed noise, air reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist'? Other and water impacts much more thor- communities are rejecting limestone quarries as reservoirs in karst geolog- oughly than the steps O-N Minerals ical areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to outlined in its proffers to the county. easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has experienced In a personal letter sent to the com- some water quality problems in limestone quarries used as reservoirs at pany in September, 2007, Board of Stephen's City and Clearbrook. Supervisors Chairman Richard C. Shickle asked the company "to review Company Changes Hands - Again and seriously consider the plan `Preserve Frederick' has sent you." The mining rezoning was filed in June 2005 by the Chemstone While the company acknowl- Company, also known as O-N Minerals, a division of ;Oglebay Norton, edged receipt of the Preserve based in Cleveland, Ohio. Frederick alternative plan, all key Now, a foreign corporation, Carmeuse Lime & Stone of Belgium, elements were left out of the final has purchased Oglebay Norton Corporation of Ohio, including the proffer statement sent to the county Middletown mining operation, in a deal completed earlier this year. April 2oo8 'OPINION The Frederick Sentinel The Frederick Sentinel IMPACTS April 2oo8 EDITORIALS Time to Deny Mine Expansion The O-N Minerals request to double the size of its limestone mining operation at Middletown will have dragged on for nearly three years by the time it arrives before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on April 23. During that time, the company has never, given an inch on the enormous scale of the project. Last summer, Preserve Frederick offered the company an alternative plan. It called for rezoning 158 acres to the south of the existing quar- ry, where impacts from current operations already intrude on the land- scape. Our plan would have kept mining going for another 30 plus years, while protecting valued historic and natural resources and easing the traffic, noise, dust and water impacts on the local community. We received some criticism for offering an alternative plan for min- ing. But we recognized that O-N Minerals has options that could be exercised with fewer impacts on the Middletown community. In return, the company has never offered to scale back, even slightly, the over- sized plans it announced in 2005. O-N Minerals unwillingness to adjust its property interests to address the community's concerns is a compelling reason to end the P g long drama over mining in Middletown. We ask to supervisors to vote no on April 23. Vote No on Mining, Not Yes on Water / THE FREDERICK COUNTY Established 2006 An independent newspaper published by Preserve Frederick N�L Preserve Frederick www.PreserveFrederick.org preservefrederick@yahoo.com P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Preserve Frederick promotes compatible development that strengthens our communities, protects our historic and natural resources and preserves the rural character of Frederick County. Company Can't Keep Facts Straight There they go again. O-N Minerals can't resist making big claims that, on close examination, just aren't true. Among the whoppers we've been collecting since 2006, consider: "We aren't expanding the mine operation." "This land is not part of the core area of the Cedar Creek battlefield." The county promised to rezone our land back in 1980." Mining Operations toDoi-ible "There has been a false impres- sion that this rezoning will somehow `expand' the Middletown quarry. But we will continue to operate at the same pace, with the same people, the same number of trucks," O-N Minerals' Joe Ferrell told the Winchester Star back in October, 2006. Maybe we got that "false impres- sion" from the fact that the words "expand" and "expansion" are used in the mining rezoning application no less than six times. Or from the company's own website, which states that its local operations have ."a commitment to expand produc- tion to meet growing market demands." O-N Minerals currently mines limestone in one quarry pit on about 622 acres it leases from Genstar Corp. With the rezoning, O-N plans to create three new quarry pits on land it owns outright; one to the south of existing operations and two to the north, on either side of Chapel Road. The company goes on to claim that only 12 percent of the land it owns will be quarried. What it does- n't say is that behind the proposed berms and buffers, 639 acres now zoned for farms, forest and limited homesites will be subject to all the industrial activities associated with mining; earthmoving, blasting and storing piles of "overburden," the soil and rock leftover once limestone is extracted. O-N is asking to double the size of limestone mining operations at Middletown, to a total of 1,261 acres on a corridor 2.6 miles long. Sure sounds like an expansion to us. Property Within Battlefield Core Area O-N Minerals officials deny that the land they want to rezone was ever an important part of the Battle of Cedar Creek. They insist that "lit- tle fighting occurred on this land, aside from troop movements" on the 533 acre parcel divided by Chapel Road. Not so. While the land may not lie within the National Historical Park bound- ary, the property is shown clearly within the core area of the battle - rezone the property from agricultur- al to extractive manufacturing land uses. They point to a letter dated April 7, 1980 and signed by John R. Riley, then Frederick County Director of Planning and now the County Administrator. At the time, the county was updating its Comprehensive Plan and the property was owned by U.S. Steel Corporation. Riley wrote that "Frederick County will not consider the 542 acres ... during the compre- hensive rezoning proposal for Frederick County." He continued, "The Planning Commission recognizes the intent of U.S. Steel Corporation to eventually mine this property," but "would only consider a rezoning from an agricul- tural zone to an EM zone on an indi- vidual petition basis." U.S. Steel never filed a mining rezoning in the 1980s. The land has remained zoned for agriculture ever since. field, established in 1992 by the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. This three-year study of the Valley's battlefields, mandated by Congress, was based on historical records, surveys, maps and other resources. Indeed, the study refers specifi- cally to the importance of the land threatened by expanded mining: "If continued north another half mile, this quarrying will eradicate the ruins of 18th-century Nieswander's Fort, site of Merritt's bivouac and George A. Custer's decisive flanking attack against John B. Gordon." Frederick County officials tried to correct the company. A January 3, 2006 letter from the Departmeni of Planning and Development to the late Chuck Maddox,, consultant to C-N Minerals, noted that the map "shows a portion of the property as being located within the core battle- field." No Promise Given for'Rezoning O-N Minerals executives insist they have a decades -old commit- ment from Frederick County to Company Proffers Fall Far Short O-N Minerals application to tions will be given to historic rezone 639 acres in two parcels resources and that the company hasn't changed much in nearly specifically name the recipient of three years. Not only has the com- an eight acre historic reserve to be pany failed to reduce the size of the donated to a preservation group. rezoning by a single acre, its final The company has only agreed to proffer statement, a legally binding protect two cemeteries, not the list of restrictions, fails to provide archeological remains of the detail on protection and Nieswander Fort or any other enforcement that county staff have structures or battlefield resources. requested again and again. It did not name the recipient of the The clearest picture of how little reserve. has changed is evident in the September 8, 2006 letter from Truck Traffic county Deputy Planning Director Michael T. Ruddy to O-N Minerals Mr. Ruddy requested the com- attorney, Thomas M. Lawson, pany address the potential impacts commenting on a proffer statement associated with an increase of min - dated August 23, 2006. Most of the ing trucks on streets in county`s concerns remain unad- Middletown. There is no evidence dressed in the final proffer state- in the latest proffer statement that ment submitted March 18, 2008. the impacts were studied. Size of project GroundWater/Dust Control/Blasting Controls Mr. Ruddy suggested that" "lim- iting the potential acreage of level- Mr. Ruddy wrote that "An opment ... would limit the poten- alternative approach for the appli- tial impacts of expanded mining cation and proffer statement may on the community. The company be to seek to better understand the never reduced the scale of the Potential impacts associated with rezoning. the proposed mining operations and seek to avoid them by refining Enforcement the potential scope of mining operation." There has been no ME Ruddy expressed concern change in the size and scope of the that the county could end up rezoning. responsible for enforcing problems with neighbors' wells and struc- Proffers That Aren't tures caused by expanded mining. Really Proffers The company offered to hire inde- pendent firms to conduct surveys Mr. Ruddy noted that the com- ofwells and structures prior to new pany was offering to give up, by mining and after problems are Proffer, things already required by reported. But those firms would be county rules, other agencies or paid by O-N Minerals to assess the existing contracts. These include: company's own damage and liabil- creating distance buffers to block ity, a sure source of conflict with views of the mining operation, con - neighboring landowners. Such trolling dust on the site, adhering to conflicts inevitably end up before state limits on mining noise and county officials. lighting, maintaining a state air permit and granting water rights to Historic resources the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The company did not Mr. Ruddy recommended that remove these items from its final the company address what protec- . proffer statement. Radical Plan Would Phase Expansion In the final proffer statement, O-N Minerals offered an untested plan to phase the opening of new limestone quarries over 30 years. It calls for mining to begin immediately after the rezoning on the parcel south of the existing mining operation, to start 10 years after the rezoning on the par- cel north of the existing mine and south of Chapel Road and to start 20 years after the rezoning on the parcel north of Chapel Road. Company officials admitted the concept was "revolutionary" when asked about it at a community meeting in Middletown April 2. In fact, it is unheard of in the Commonwealth of Virginia. O-N Minerals' own attor- ney admitted that not one other county in the state had ever agreed to an industrial land use rezoning with a timetable for phasing the develop- ment. Local governments traditionally do not want to tie the hands of future decision -makers. When a county designates an area for industrial or com- mercial land uses in its comprehensive plan, land use map and zoning ordinances, it encourages these land uses in the present or near future. Longer term goals are adapted as community needs change. In Virginia, phased development has only been applied to large resi- dential and commercial rezoning applications. By setting a timetable for when new houses, offices and shops will be built, both the developers and county officials can coordinate the roads, schools, water, sewer and other services the project will need. Preserve Frederick Crafted Option for Rezoning In August 2007, Preserve Frederick sent O-N Minerals a rea- sonable alternative to the company's Mining Rezoning Alternative Plan massive expansion , of limestone mining at Middletown. The alterna- tive would have greatly reduced the impacts of mining on the rural and historic landscape and quality of life urren i . i g r// j�iTl� in Southern Frederick County. >, p ra i Preserve Frederick hired land use yFN� planner John Hutchinson, principal in the Jennings Gap Partnership in Staunton, to help develop the alter- CO` native. He studied the rezoning request, .the limestone seam in the /._ _ •... • -' area, the natural and historic resources on the property up for rezoning, and recommendations from Frederick County. planning ' N B of f e l' staff on ways to reduce the impacts of the rezoning. The Preserve Frederick plan would have provided for expanded # 2. mining on the site for at least 30 0 500 1,000 1 , i i I Feet �� years, while preserving nearly all of 5' RM the historic battlefield resources, protecting the natural resources on called for rezoning thel58-acre par- chairman of the county Board of Cedar Creek and providing a signif- cel on the southern end, which is Supervisors, Richard C. Shickle. icant buffer against noise, dust and adjacent to the existing mining oper- The chairman subsequently wrote traffic impacts for the neighbors. ation and already visually impacted to O-N Minerals, asking it to A critical element was to shrink by it. "review and seriously consider the the proposed expansion. Specif- Preserve Frederick shared its plan `Preserve Frederick' sent to ically, the Preserve Frederick . plan . alternative plan with Middletown you." removed a large parcel from the neighbors and other stakeholders, Ultimately, O-N Minerals rezoning, 533 acres on the north end county planning staff, County refused to reduce its rezoning of the Cedar Creek battlefield. It Administrator John R. Riley and the request by a single acre. J Truck Traffic: 200? 410009 1300 A Day? When the Middletown mining rezoning first came to public attention in April, 2006, O-N Mineral's own traffic impact analysis projected that industrial truck traffic on the area's narrow rural roads would soar to 1,305 dump trucks a day streaming through the heart of Middletown. That equals one dump truck per minute, 24 hours per day. Only after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected the mining rezoning in June, 2006, did O-N Minerals repudiate the traffic statement included in the original rezoning application. The company stopped talk- ing about expanding its operations and insisted new quarries would open, but truck traffic would barely grow. The proffer statement filed March 18, 2008 agrees to restrict truck traffic "to a maximum of 200 truck loads per day averaged over the prior 30 days through the scale house." But the trucks logged through the scale house are full, so this measure only counts the outbound truck trips. Therefore, if 200 trucks pass through the scale house each day, a total of 400 trucks actually will rumble in and out of Middletown. That is a huge increase over the number of trucks the company currently reports, from 50 to 70 through the scale house, or 100 to 140 a day. Ap.,,,aoe GET INVOLVED The Frederick Sentinel Is this the Future of Southern Frederick County? "]C�ARD M...AliE YO R V Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 rshickle@shentel.net (h)540-667-2264 Back Creek: Gary Lofton Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove Opequon: Bill M. Ewing Shawnee: Gene. E. Fisher Stonewall: Charles DeHaven 540-869-1972 gary@garylofton.org 540-662-2734 garydove4@comcast.net 540-869-505 8 supervisorewing@yahoo.com (h)540--662-5238. gfisher@visuallink.com (w)540-665-4938 540-662-7421 cdehaven@crosslink.net Red Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-722-3673 plemieux@visuallink.com Planning Commissioners Speak Out "Fundamentally, as`.a. land -use issue, the time for the, expansion of this quarry and the industrial use of these particular properties is frankly passed. " — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Christopher Mohn, June 7, 2006 "I know of absolutely nothing -,I can conceive of nothing - that can be proffered that would make this an acceptable rezoning for me. " — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Robert Morris, June 7, 2006 "When you. -,have that many questions, and that many concerns, it would seem to 'belie that there is something not quite right about this. This is a square peg trying to be jammed into a round hole." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Rick C. Ours, June 7, 2006 Sample Letter: Write or Email Your Supervisor Dear Supervisor _ I am writing tc object to the request by O-N Minerals to rezone a huge tract of land near Middletown for an industrial mining corridor. This project, next to three of the greatest assets our county has to offer — Cedar Creek, the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park and historic Middletown — and nearby homes and farms, is too big. And O-N Minerals has never offered to scale back their plan despite appeals from local groups and coun- ty staff for nearly three years. I understand the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) supports the rezoning in order to use the quarry pits to store water after mining has ceased. I don't believe we should sacrifice Middletown's unique quality of life for this rezoning, when the FCSA cc)ul.dstore water at the Strasburg quarry next door. Please vote no on the O-N Minerals mining rezoning request. Sincerely yours, Name & Address YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK i ❑ Enclosed is my $50 tax-deductible* gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick Ceunty. ❑ . Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the Frederick County Sentinel. ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. E-mail address: i Name: i Street Address/PO Box: i i City/State/Zip: i Telephone Number: (Home/Work) (Cell) Please make check payable to: Preserve Frederick, P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Contact us at: preservefrederick@yahoo.com i Preserve Frederick is recognized by the IRS as a non-profit charitable organization. Gifts are tax deductible as allowed by law. i L------------------------------------------- ----- 7----------------------------- 0 POSTAL CUSTOMER N41 / THE FREDERICK COUNTY 1 C Nonprofit Org., U.S. Postage PAID Winchester, VA Permit No. 102 ECRWSS FREE PUBLISHED BY PRESERVE FREDERICK April 2oo8 WE INFORM — YOU DECIDE Massive Mining Corridor I roposed Around Middletown Nearly two years after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected an application to greatly expand limestone mining near Middletown, the county Board of Supervisors will consider the request at a public hearing April 23. O-N Minerals Company is seek- ing to rezone 639 acres from rural agriculture to industrial mining on two parcels adjacent to its existing mining operations. The rezoning would double existing mine opera- tions and create a 1,261-acre indus- trial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and about two-thirds of a mile wide adjacent to the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park and historic Middletown. The enormous size of the rezon- ing is little changed since it was filed in June, 2005. O-N Minerals executives last year rejected an alternative plan from Preserve Frederick to reduce the scale of the project, better balance mining expansion with community con- cerns and lessen the impacts on the southern Frederick community. Conflicts with Local Plans & Land Uses o-N Minerals seeks to rezone 639 acres to create an industrial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and two-thirds mile wide next to historic Middletown and the National Historical Park. The tremendous expansion of limestone mining conflicts with the al. In the past 15 years, new subdivi- bridge over Cedar Creek to divert on March 18, 2008. O-N Minerals The Board of Supervisors will Frederick County and Middletown sions, notably Westernview and mining trucks from Middletown and continues to demand a mammoth consider the mining rezoning on Comprehensive Plans and other Chimney Hills, were created- near an archeological survey of core bat- expansion with little more than April 23 at. 7 pm at the County local economic development, efforts. the parcels up for rezoning. But res- tlefield areas and the Nieswander Fort berms to buffer the surrounding Government Center, 107 North Kent Impacts would include an increase idents in these, enclaves and site on the property. community from the impacts. Street, Winchester. in industrial truck traffic, air pollu Middletown said they were given no Deputy Planning Director tion, water pollution and changes to indication the county would permit Michael T. Ruddy wrote Thomas M. the water table, noise and dust from expanded mining near their homes. Lawson, O-N Minerals local attor- • • limestone mining, and visual pollu- Frederick County planners offered ney, a letter on September 8, 2006, to 1 n nRequest tion from expanded mine waste many recommendations to improve suggest that "limiting the potential piles. the rezoning request. A January 3, acreage of development ... would The properties surrounding the 2006 letter from planner Candice E. limit the potential impacts" of • current mining operation are zoned Perkins sought to reduce the impact expanded mining. Tied to WaterPlan rural areas or residential/agricultur- on historic resources by calling for a O-N Land at Cedar Creek 0 ®p Proposed Mining . Corridor N Proposed Rezoning Current Mining Operation National Park 0 0.5 1 IMlles Proposed Industrial Mining Corridor Data source: Frederick County, VDCR. Although e"ods have been made to verify data, accuracy is not guaranteed Alternative Plan The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is paying for the O-N Rejected Minerals rezoning application for expanded mining near Middletown. The agency agreed to do so when it signed�n agreement in 2000 to acquire the com- pany's quarry pits for water storage after mining operations cease. This agree - The Frederick County Planning ment between the FCSA and O-N Minerals raises a host of troubling questions. Commission voted 8 to 4 to reject why does the FCSA need three new quarry pits from the rezoning, when it the mining rezoning request in June, could simply use the existing quarry pit at Strasburg to store water? At a com- 2006. After waiting for action for munity meeting in Middletown April 2, O-N Minerals General Manager more than a year, Preserve Frederick Spencer C. Stinson said the Strasburg quarry holds "a billion gallons of water." sent O-N Minerals an alternative Must Southern Frederick residents accept a vast new mining corridor to mining plan. complete a water plan created by a private agency, with no public comment, The alternative plan provided for or support? The FCSA water plan, the lease agreement with O-N Minerals expanded mining on a smaller scale and the rezoning for expanded mining were not debated in 2000, Area res- in an area already greatly affected by idents were not given a chance to discuss the wisdom of expanded mining the existing mine operations. Other near a national park and historic town in return for public water storage, a measures would have protected nat- need that could be better met by other options. ural and historic resources, diverted Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such truck traffic and addressed noise, air reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? Other and water impacts much more thor- communities are rejecting limestone quarries as reservoirs in karst geolog- oughly than the steps O-N Minerals ical areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to outlined in its proffers to the county. easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has experienced In a personal letter sent to the com- some water quality problems in limestone quarries used as reservoirs at pany in September, 2007, Board of Stephen's City and Clearbrook. upervrsors arrman rc ar Shickle asked the company "to review and seriously consider the plan `Preserve Frederick' has sent to you." While the company acknowl- edged receipt of the Preserve Frederick alternative plan, all key elements were left out of the final proffer statement sent to the county April 2008 OPINION The Frederick Sentinel The Frederick Sentinel IMPACTS April 2oo8 rezone the property from agricultur- al to extractive manufacturing land uses. They point to a letter dated April 7, 1980 and signed by John R. Riley, then Frederick County Director of Planning and now the County Administrator. At the time, the county was updating its Comprehensive Plan and the property was owned by U.S. Steel Corporation. Riley wrote that "Frederick County will not consider the 542 acres ... during the compre- hensive rezoning proposal for Frederick County." He continued, "The Planning Commission recognizes the intent of U.S. Steel Corporation to eventually mine this property," but "would only consider a rezoning from an agricul- tural zone to an EM zone on an indi- vidual petition basis." U.S. Steel never filed a mining rezoning in the 1980s. The land has remained zoned for agriculture ever since. EDITORIALS Time to Deny Mine Expansion The O-N Minerals request to double the size of its limestone mining operation at Middletown will have dragged on for nearly three years by' the time it arrives before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on April 23. During that time, the company has never given an inch on the enormous scale of the project. , Last summer, Preserve Frederick offered the company an alternative plan. It called for rezoning 158 acres to the south of the existing quar- ry, where impacts from current operations already intrude on the land- scape. Our plan would have kept mining going for another 30 plus years, while protecting valued historic and natural resources and easing the traffic, noise, dust and water impacts on the local community. We received some criticism for offering an alternative plan for min- ing. But we recognized that O-N Minerals has options that could be exercised with fewer impacts on the Middletown community. In return, the company has never offered to scale back, even slightly, the over- sized plans it announced in 2005. O-N Minerals unwillingness to adjust its property interests to address the community's concerns is a compelling reason to end the long drama over mining in Middletown. We ask to supervisors to vote no on April 23. Vote No on Mining, Not Yes on Water / THE FREDERICK COUNTY Established 2006 An independent newspaper published by Preserve Frederick Preserve Frederick www.PreserveFredefick.org preservefrederick@yahoo.com P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Preserve Frederick promotes compatible development that strengthens our communities, protects our historic and natural resources and presenes the rural character of Frederick County. Company Can't Keep Facts Straight There they go again. O-N Minerals can't resist making big claims that, on close examination, just aren't true. Among the whoppers we've been collecting since 2006, consider: "We aren't expanding the mine operation." "This land is not part of the core area of the Cedar Creek battlefield." "The county promised to rezone our land back in' 1980." Mining Operations to Double "There has been a false impres- sion that this rezoning will somehow `expand' the Middletown quarry. But we will continue to operate at the same pace, with the same people, the same number of trucks," O-N Minerals' Joe Ferrell told the Winchester Star back in October, 2006. Maybe we got that "false impres- sion" from the fact that the words "expand" and "expansion" are used in the mining rezoning application no less than six times. Or from the company's own website, which states that its local operations have "a commitment to expand produc- tion to meet growing market demands." O-N Minerals currently mines limestone in one quarry pit on about 622 acres it leases from Genstar Corp. With the rezoning, O-N plans to create three new quarry pits on land it owns outright; one to the south of existing operations and two to the north, on either side of Chapel Road. The company goes on to claim that only 12 percent of the land it owns will be quarried. What it does- n't say is that behind the proposed berms and buffers, 639 acres now zoned for farms, forest and limited homesites will be subject to all the industrial activities associated with mining; earthmoving, blasting and storing piles of "overburden," the soil and rock leftover once limestone is extracted. O-N is asking to double the size of limestone mining operations at Middletown, to a total of 1,261 acres on a corridor 2.6 miles long. Sure sounds like an expansion to us. Property Within Battlefield Core Area O-N Minerals officials deny that the land they want to rezone was ever an important part of the Battle of Cedar Creek. They insist that "lit- tle fighting occurred on this land, aside from troop movements" on the 533 acre parcel divided by Chapel Road. Not so. While the land may not lie within the National Historical Park bound- ary, the property is shown clearly within the core area of the battle - field, established in 1992 by the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. This three-year study of the Valley's battlefields, mandated by Congress, was based on historical records, surveys, maps and other resources. Indeed, the study refers � specifi- cally to the importance of the land threatened by expanded mining: "If continued north another half mile, this quarrying will eradicate the ruins of 18th-century Nieswander's Fort, site of Merritt's bivouac and George A. Custer's decisive flanking attack against John B. Gordon." Frederick County officials tried to correct the company. A January 3, 2006 letter from the Department of Planning and Development to the late Chuck Maddox, consultant to O-N Minerals, noted that the map "shows a portion of the property as being located within the core battle- field." No Promise Given for Rezoning O-N Minerals executives insist they have a decades -old commit- ment from Frederick County to Company Proffers Fall Far. Short O-N Minerals application to rezone 639 acres in two parcels. hasn't changed much in nearly three years. Not only has the com- pany failed to reduce the size of the rezoning by a single acre, its final proffer statement, a legally binding list of restrictions, fails to provide the detail on protection and enforcement that county staff have requested again and again. The clearest picture of how little has changed is evident in the September 8, 2006 letter from county Deputy Planning Director Michael T. Ruddy to O-N Minerals attorney, Thomas M. Lawson, commenting on a proffer statement dated August 23, 2006. Most of the county `s concerns remain unad- dressed in the final proffer state- ment submitted March 18, 2008. tions will be given to historic resources and that the company specifically name the recipient of an eight acre historic reserve to be donated. to a preservation group. The company has only agreed to protect two cemeteries, not the archeological - remains of Nieswander Fort or any other structures or battlefield resources. It did not name the recipient of the reserve. Truck Traffic Mr. Ruddy requested the com- pany address the potential impacts associated with an increase of min- ing trucks on streets in Middletown. There is no evidence in the latest proffer statement that the impacts were studied. Preserve Frederick Crafted Option for Rezoning In August 2007, Preserve Frederick sent O-N Minerals a rea- sonable alternative to the company's massive expansion of limestone mining at Middletown. The alterna- tive would have greatly reduced the .impacts of mining on the rural and historic landscape and quality of life in Southern Frederick County. Preserve Frederick hired land use planner John Hutchinson, principal in 'the Jennings Gap Partnership in Staunton, to help develop the alter- native. He studied the rezoning request, the limestone seam in the area, the natural and historic resources on the property up for rezoning, and 'recommendations from Frederick County planning staff on ways to reduce the impacts of the rezoning. . The Preserve Frederick plan would have provided for expanded Size of project GroundWater Dust / mining on the site for at least 30 0 500 1,000 8 \ £ "lim- Control/Blasting Controls years, while preserving nearly all of £ I Feet ,y Mr. Ruddy suggested that iting the potential acreage of Bevel- Mr. Rudd wrote that "An Y the historic battlefield resources, opment ... would limit the poten- p alternative approach for the appli- protecting the natural -resources on called for rezoning thel58-acre par- chairman of the county Board of » of expanded mining cation and proffer statement may P Y Cedar Creek and providing a signif- cel on the southern end, ; which is Supervisors, Richard C. Shickle. onimpacts on the community. The company be to seek to better understand. the icant buffer against noise, dust and adjacent to the existing -mining minin o er- The chairman subsequently wrote g J g� g P q y never reduced the scale of the Potential impacts associated with traffic impacts for the neighbors. ation and already visually impacted to O-N Minerals, asking it to rezoning. the proposed mining operations A critical element was to shrink b it "review and seriously consider the Y `expansion. and seek to avoid them by refining the proposed Specif- Preserve Frederick shared its plan `Preserve Frederick' sent to Enforcement the potential scope of mining ically, the Preserve Frederick plan alternative plan with Middletown you." operation." There has been no removed a large parcel from the neighbors and other stakeholders, Ultimately, O-N Minerals Mr. Ruddy expressed concern change in the size and scope of the rezoning, 533 acres on the north end county planning staff, County refused to reduce its rezoning that the county could end up rezoning. of the Cedar Creek. battlefield. It Administrator John R. Riley and the request by a single acre. responsible for enforcing problems with neighbors' wells and struc- Proffers That Aren't�s tures caused by expanded mining. Really Proffers The company_ offered to hire inde :n =� 3 pendent firms to conduct surveys Mr. Rudd noted that the corn- � -��- � •"�.x ,;�_ , of wells and structures prior t p o new an was offering to give u P Y g g P� by. CC p mining and after problems are proffer, thins already required b g Y q Y aa reported. But those firms would be cou t rules other agencies or:::-w" .a< --. �,.;...'�.,�h;;:.. ;=Y;;££ ''>�� _� paid by O N Minerals to assess the existing contracts. These include: g . ,.:>:•:_ .F.,.: •��_• _ � � ;,� company's own damage and liabil- creating distance buffers to block g it , a sure source of conflict with Y views of the mining operation, con - g P neighboring landowners. Such trolling dust on the site adhering to g � g G F conflicts inevitably end up before state limits on mining noise and county officials. lighting, maintaining a state air permit and granting water rights to Historic resources the Frederick Count Y Sanitation Authority. The company did not Mr. Ruddy recommended that remove these items from its final , the company address what protec- proffer statement. - Radical Plan Would Phase Expansion 11 In the final proffer statement, O-N Minerals offered an untested plan to phase the opening of new limestone quarries over 30 years. It calls for mining to begin immediately after the rezoning on the parcel south of the existing mining operation, to start 10 years after the rezoning on the par- cel north of the existing mine and south of Chapel Road and to start 20 years after the rezoning on the parcel north of Chapel Road. Company officials admitted the concept was "revolutionary" when asked about it at a community meeting in Middletown April 2. In fact, it is unheard of in the Commonwealth of Virginia. O-N Minerals' own attor- ney admitted that not one other county in the state had ever agreed to an industrial land use rezoning with a timetable for phasing the develop- ment. Local governments traditionally do not want to tie the hands of future decision -makers. When a county designates an area for industrial or com- mercial land uses in its comprehensive plan, land use map and zoning ordinances, it encourages these land uses in the present or near future. Longer term goals are adapted as community needs change. In Virginia, phased development has only been applied to large resi- dential and commercial rezoning applications. By setting a timetable for when new houses, offices and shops will be built, both the developers and county officials can coordinate the roads, schools, water, sewer and other services the project will need. Truck Traffic0 : 200? 40009 1300 A Day? When the Middletown mining rezoning first came to public attention in April, 2006, O-N Mineral's own traffic impact analysis projected that industrial truck traffic on the area's narrow rural roads would soar to 1,305 dump trucks a day streaming through the heart of Middletown. That equals one dump truck per minute, 24 hours per day. Only after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected the mining rezoning in June, 2006, did O-N Minerals repudiate the traffic statement included in the original rezoning application. The company stopped talk- ing about expanding its operations and insisted new quarries would open, but truck traffic would barely grow. The proffer statement filed March 18, 2008 agrees to restrict truck traffic "to a maximum of 200 truck loads per day averaged over the prior 30 days through the scale house." But the trucks logged through the scale house are full, so this measure only counts the outbound truck trips. Therefore, if 200 trucks pass through the scale house each day, a total of 400 trucks actually will rumble in and out of Middletown. That is a huge increase over the number of trucks the company currently reports, from 50 to 70 through the scale house, or 100 to 140 a day. i April=ooa GET INVOLI'ED The Frederick ..n„n. Is this the Future of Southern Frederick County? Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 rshickle@shentel.net (h)540-667-2264 Back Creek: Gary Lofton 540-869-1972 gary@garylofton.org Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove. Opequon: Bill M. Ewing Shawnee: Gene E. Fisher 540-662-2734 540-869-5058 (h)540-662-5238 (w)540-665-4938 Stonewall: Charles DeHaven 540-662-7421 Red Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-722-3673 garydove4@comcast.net supervisorewing@vahoo.com gfisher@visuallink.com cdehaven @ cros slink -net plemieux@visuallink.com Planning Commissioners Speak Out _v'unda ttetaally, as a land -use issue, the time for the expansion of this quarry and the industrial use of these particular properties is frankly passed. " — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Christopher Mohn, June 7, 2006 U know of absolutely nothing - I can conceive of nothing - that can be proffered that would make this an acceptable rezoning for me. — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Robert Morris, June 7, 2006 'When you have that many questions, and that many concerns, it would seem to belie that there is something not quite right about' this. This is a square peg trying to be jammed into a round hole." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Rick C. Ours, June 7, 2006 Sample Letter: Write or Email Your Supervisor Dear Supervisor I am writing to object to the request by O-N Minerals to rezone a huge tract of land near Middletown for an industrial mining corridor. This project, next to three of the greatest assets our county has to offer — Cedar Creek, the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park and historic Middletown -- and nearby homes and farms, is too big. And O-N Minerals has never offered to scale back their plan despite appeals from local groups and coun- ty staff for nearly three years. I understand the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) supports the rezoning in order to use the quarry pits to store water after mining has ceased. I don't believe we should sacrifice Middletown's unique quality of life for this rezoning, when the FCSA could store water at the Strasburg quarry next door. Please vote no on the O-N Minerals mining rezoning request. Sincerely yours, Name & Address YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK ❑ Enclosed is my $50 tax-deductible* gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick County. ❑ Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the Frederick County Sentinel. ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. E-mail address: I I � i Name: i Street Address/PO Box: City/State/Zip: I Telephone Number: (Home/Work) (Cell) Please make check payable to: Preserve Frederick, P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Contact us at: preservefrederick@yahoo.com * Preserve Frederick is recognized by the IRS as a non-profit charitable organization. Gifts are tax deductible as allowed by law. i i 4- THE FREDERICK PUBLISHED BY PRESERVE FREDERICK OUNTY r POSTAL CUSTOMER IIWO,& April 2oo8 Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAID Winchester, VA Permit'No. 102 ECRWSS J:1� Massive Mining Corridor Proposed Around Middletown Nearly two years after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected an application to greatly expand limestone mining near Middletown, the county Board of Supervisors will consider the request at a public hearing April 23. O-N Minerals Company is seek- ing to rezone 639 acres from rural agriculture to industrial mining on two parcels adjacent to its existing mining operations. The rezoning would double existing mine opera- tions and create a 1,261-acre indus- trial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long' and about two-thirds of a mile wide adjacent to the Cedar Creek and; Belle Grove National Historical park and historic Middletown. The enormous size of the rezon- ing is little changed since it was filed in June, 2005. O-N Minerals executives last year rejected an alternative plan from Preserve Frederick to reduce the scale of the project; better balance mining expansion with community con- cerns and lessen the impacts on the southern Frederick community. Conflicts with Local Plans UiC Lail, t1 SG'S u-N minerals seeks to rezone 639 acres to create an industrial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and two-thirds mile wide next to historic Middletown and the National Historical Dark. The tremendous expansion of limestone mining conflicts with the al. In the past 15 years, new subdivi- bridge over Cedar Creek to divert on March 18, 2008. O-N Minerals The Board of Supervisors will Frederick County and Middletown sions, notably Westernview and mining trucks from Middletown and continues to demand a mammoth consider the mining rezoning on Comprehensive Plans and other Chimney Hills, were created near an archeological survey of core bat- expansion with little more than April 23 at 7 pm at the County local economic development efforts. the parcels up for rezoning. But res- tlefield areas and the Nieswander Fort berms to buffer the surrounding Government Center, 107 North Kent Impacts would include an increase idents in these enclaves and site on the property. community from the impacts. Street, Winchester. in industrial truck traffic, air pollu- Middletown said they were given no Deputy Planning Director tion, water pollution and changes to indication the county would permit Michael T. Ruddy wrote Thomas M. the water table, noise and dust from, expanded mining near their homes. Lawson, O-N Minerals local attor- • • limestone mining, and visual pollu- Frederick County planners offered ney, a letter on September 8, 2006, to tion from expanded mine waste many recommendations to improve suggest that "limiting the potential Mining Request piles. the rezoning request. A January 3, acreage of development ... would The properties surrounding the 2006 letter from planner Candice E. limit the potential impacts" of Tied tote1current mining operation are zoned Perkins sought to reduce the impact expanded mining. rural areas or residential/agricultur- on historic resources by calling for a Plan O-N Land at Cedar Creek '',Proposed Mining Corridor N Proposed Rezoning Current Mining Operation National Park 0 0.5 L I Miles Proposed Industrial Mining Corridor Data source. Fredanck County VDGR Although eRohs have heap made to perry dew, raoy a a., euaraocaaa Alternative Plan The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is paying for the O-N Rejected Minerals rezoning application for expanded mining near Middletown. The agency agreed to do so when it signed an agreement in 2000 to acquire the com- pany's quarry pits for water storage after mining operations cease. This agree - The Frederick County Planning ment between the FCSA and O-N Minerals raises a host of troubling questions. Commission voted 8 to 4 to reject Why does the FCSA need three new quarry pits from the rezoning, when it the mining rezoning request in June, could simply use the existing quarry pit at Strasburg to store water? At a com- 2006. After waiting for action for munity meeting in Middletown April 2, O-N Minerals General Manager more than a year, Preserve Frederick Spencer C. Stinson said the Strasburg quarry holds "a billion gallons of water." sent O-N Minerals an alternative Must Southern Frederick residents accept a vast new mining corridor to mining plan. complete a water plan created by a private agency, with no public comment The alternative plan provided for or support? The FCSA water plan, the lease agreement with O-N Minerals expanded mining on a smaller scale and the rezoning for expanded mining were not debated in 2000. Area res- in an area already greatly affected by idents were not given a chance to discuss the .wisdom of expanded mining the existing mine operations. Other near a national park and historic town in return for public water storage, a measures would have protected nat- need that could be better met by other options. ural and historic resources, diverted Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such truck traffic and addressed noise, air reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? Other and water impacts much more thor- communities are rejecting limestone quarries as reservoirs in karst geolog- oughly than the steps O-N Minerals ical areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to outlined in its proffers to the county. easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has experienced In a personal letter sent to the com- some water quality problems in limestone quarries used as reservoirs at pany in September, 2007, Board of Stephen's City and Clearbrook. Supervisors Chairman Richard C Shickle asked the company "to review and seriously consider the plan `Preserve Frederick' has sent to you." While the company acknowl- edged receipt of the Preserve Frederick alternative plan, all key elements were left out of the final proffer statement sent to the county AP 2 ril o08 OPINION The Frederick Sentinel EDITORIALS Time to Deny Mine Expansion The O-N Minerals request to double the size of its limestone mining operation at Middletown will have dragged on for nearly three years by the time it arrives before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on April 23. During that time, the company has never given an inch on the enormous scale cf the project. . Last summer, Preserve Frederick offered the company an alternative plan. It called for rezoning 158 acres to the south'of the existing quar- ry, where impacts from current operations already intrude on the land- scape. Our plan would have kept mining going for another 30 plus years, while protecting valued historic and natural resources and easing the traffic, noise, dust and water impacts on the local community. We received some criticism for offering an alternative plan for min- ing: But we recognized that O-N Minerals has options that could be exercised with fewer impacts on the Middletown community. In return, the company has never offered to scale back, even slightly, the over- sized plans it announced in 2005. O-N Minerals unwillingness to adjust its property interests to address the community's concerns is a compelling reason to end the long drama over mining in Middletown. We ask to supervisors to vote no on April 23. Vote No..".on Mining, Not Yes on Water j THE FREDERICK'6OUNTY Established 2006 An independent newspaper published by Preserve Frederick www.PreserveFrederick.org preservefrederick@yahoo.com P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Preserve Frederick promotes compatible development that strengthens our communities, protects our historic and natural resources and preserves the rural character of Frederick County. Lompany Lan. t Iteep Facts Straight There they go again. O-N Minerals can't resist making big claims that, on close examination, just aren't true. Among the whoppers we've been collecting since 2006, consider: "We aren't expanding the mine operation." "This land ' is not -part of the core area of the Cedar Creek battlefield." "The county promised to rezone our land back in 1980." Mining Operations to Double "There has been a false impres- sion that this rezoning will somehow `expand' the Middletown quarry. But we will continue to operate at the same pace, with the same people, the same number of trucks," O-N Minerals' Joe Ferrell told the Winchester Star back in October, 2006. Maybe we got that "false impres- sion" from the fact that the words "expand" and "expansion" are used in the mining rezoning application no less than six times. Or from the company's own website, which states that its local operations have "a commitment to expand produc- tion to meet growing market demands." , O-N Minerals currently mines limestone in one quarry pit on about 622 acres it leases from Genstar Corp. With the rezoning, O-N plans to create three new quarry pits on land it owns outright; one to the south of existing operations and two to the north, on either side of Chapel Road. The company goes on to claim that only 12 percent of the land it owns will be quarried. What it does- n't say is that behind the proposed berms and buffers, 639 acres now zoned for farms, forest and limited homesites will be subject to all the industrial activities associated with mining; earthmoving, blasting and storing piles of "overburden," the soil and rock leftover once limestone is extracted. O-N is asking to double the size of limestone mining operations at Middletown, to a total of 1,261 acres on a corridor 2.6 miles long. Sure sounds like an expansion to us. Property Within Battlefield Core Area O-N Minerals officials deny that the land they want to rezone was ever an important part of the Battle of Cedar Creek. They insist that "lit- tle fighting occurred on this land, aside from troop movements" on the 533 acre parcel divided by Chapel Road. Not so. While the land may not lie within the National Historical Park bound- ary, the property is shown clearly within the core area of the battle - field, established in 1992 by the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley, of Virginia. This three-year study of the Valley's battlefields, mandated by Congress, was based on historical records, surveys, maps and other resources. Indeed, the study refers specifi- cally to the importance of the land threatened by expanded mining: "If continued north another half mile, this quarrying will eradicate the ruins of 18th-century Nieswander's Fort, site of Merritt's bivouac and George A. Custer's decisive flanking attack against John B. Gordon." Frederick County officials tried to correct the company. A January 3, 2006 letter from the Department of Planning and Development to the late Chuck, Maddox, consultant to O-N Minerals, noted that the map "shows a portion of the property as being located within the core battle- field." No Promise Given for Rezoning O-N Minerals executives insist they have a decades -old commit- ment from Frederick County to rezone the property from agricultur- al to extractive manufacturing land uses. They point to a letter dated April 7, 1980 and signed by John R. Riley, then Frederick County Director of Planning and now the County Administrator. At the time, the county was updating its Comprehensive Plan and the property was owned by U.S. Steel Corporation. Riley wrote that "Frederick County will not consider the 542 acres ... during the compre- hensive rezoning proposal for Frederick County." He continued, "The Planning Commission recognizes the intent of U.S. Steel Corporation to eventually mine this property," but "would only consider a rezoning from an agricul- tural zone to an EM zone on an indi- vidual petition basis." U.S. Steel never filed a mining rezoning in the 1980s. The land has remained zoned for agriculture ever since. Historic Resources on O-N Land at Cedar Creek .......... National Park Proposed Rezoning N Current Mining Operation r ®ae Proposed Mining 4.Corridor Battle of Cedar Creek _ Confederate Troop Movements and Positions Federal Troop = Movements and Positions A Federal Camps 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Daly source: Frederick County, VDCR. Although efforts have been made to verify data, -racy is not guaranteed The Frederick Sentinel April 2oo8 IMPACTS Company Proffers Fall Far Short O-N Minerals application to tions will be given to historic rezone 639 acres in two parcels resources and that the company hasn't changed much in nearly specifically name the recipient of three years. Not only has the com- an eight acre historic reserve to be pany failed to reduce the size of the donated to a preservation group. rezoning by a single acre, its final The company has only agreed to proffer statement, a legally binding protect two cemeteries, not the list of restrictions, fails to provide archeological remains of the detail on protection and Nieswander Fort or any other enforcement that county staff have structures or battlefield resources. requested again and again. It did not name the recipient of the The clearest picture of how little reserve. has changed is evident .in the September 8, 2006 letter from Truck Traffic county Deputy Planning Director Michael T. Ruddy to O-N Minerals Mr. Ruddy requested the com- attorney, Thomas M. Lawson, pany address the potential impacts commenting on a proffer statement associated with an increase of min - dated August 23, 2006.. Most of the ing trucks on streets in county`s concerns remain unad- Middletown. There is no evidence dressed in the final proffer state _ in the latest proffer statement that , ment submitted March 18, 2008. the impacts were studied. Size of project G rou ndWater/ Dust Control/Blasting Controls Mr. Ruddy suggested that "lim- iting the potential acreage of devel- Mr. Ruddy wrote that "An opment ... would limit the poten- alternative approach for the appli- tial impacts" of expanded mining cation and proffer statement may on the community. The company be to seek to better understand the never reduced the scale of the Potential impacts associated with the proposed mining operations rezoning. and seek to avoid them by refining Enforcement the potential scope of mining operation." There has been no Mr. Ruddy expressed concern change in the size and scope of the that the county could end up rezoning. responsible for enforcing problems with neighbors' wells and struc- Proffers That Aren't tures caused by expanded mining. Really Proffers The company offered to hire inde- pendent firms to conduct surveys Mr. Ruddy noted that the com- of wells and structures prior to new pany was offering to give up, by mining and after problems are Proffer, things already required by reported. But those firms would be county rules, other agencies or paid by O-N Minerals to assess the existing contracts. These include: company's own damage and liabil- creating distance buffers to block ity, asure source of conflict with views of the mining operation, con- . neighboring landowners. Such trolling dust on the site, adhering to conflicts inevitably end up before state limits on mining noise and county officials. lighting, maintaining a state air permit and granting water rights to Historic resources the Frederick County Sanitation ` Authority. The company did not Mr. Ruddy recommended that remove these items from its final the company address what protec- proffer statement. Radical Plan Would Phase Expansion In the final proffer statement, O-N Minerals offered an untested plan to phase the opening of new limestone quarries over 30 years. It calls for mining to begin immediately after ' T !--zoning on the parcel south of the existing mining operation, to start 10 years after the rezoning on the par- cel north of the existing mine and south of Chapel Road and to start 20 years after the rezoning on the parcel north of Chapel Road. Company officials admitted the concept was "revolutionary" when asked about it at a community meeting in Middletown April 2. In fact, it is unheard of in the Commonwealth of Virginia. O-N Minerals' own attor- ney admitted that not one other county in the state had ever agreed to an industrial land use rezoning with a timetable for phasing the develop- ment. Local governments traditionally do not want to tie the hands of future decision -makers. When a county designates an area for industrial or com- mercial land uses in its comprehensive plan, land use map and zoning ordinances, it encourages these land uses in the present or near future. Longer term goals are adapted as community needs change. In Virginia, phased development has only been applied to large resi- dential and commercial rezoning applications. By setting a timetable for when new houses, offices and shops will be built, both the developers and county officials can coordinate the roads, schools, water, sewer and other services the project will need. Preserve Frederick Crafted Option for Rezoning In August 2007, Preserve Frederick sent O-N Minerals a rea- Plan sonable alternative to the company's Mining Rezoning Alternative massive expansion of limestone mining at Middletown. The alterna- tive would have greatly reduced the impacts of mining on the rural and urre Mi 1 a historic landscape and quality of life %�% in Southern Frederick County. Preserve Frederick hired land use planner John Hutchinson, principal tip in the Jennings Gap Partnership in 6 Staunton, to help develop the alter- native. rezoning native. He studied g = • \` request, the limestone seam in the area, the natural and historic resources on the property up for rezoning, and recommendations from Frederick County planning Buffer staff on ways to reduce the impacts ; of the rezoning. The Preserve Frederick plan would have provided for expanded t o soo �,000 miningon the site for at least 30 p I 1 I i I Feet years, while preserving nearly all of the historic battlefield resources, protecting the natural resources on called for rezoning thel58-acre par- chairman of the county Board of Cedar Creek and providing a signif- cel on the southern end, which is Supervisors, Richard C. Shickle. icant buffer against noise, dust and adjacent to the existing mining oper- The chairman subsequently wrote traffic impacts for the neighbors. ation and already visually impacted to O-N Minerals, asking it to A critical element was to shrink by it. "review and seriously consider the the proposed expansion. Specif- Preserve Frederick shared its plan `Preserve Frederick' sent to ically, the Preserve Frederick plan alternative plan with Middletown you." removed a large parcel from the neighbors and other stakeholders, Ultimately, O-N Minerals rezoning, 533 acres on the north end county planning staff, County refused to reduce its rezoning of the Cedar Creek battlefield. It Administrator John R. Riley and the request by a single acre. Truck Traffic0 : 200? 40009 1300 A Day? When the Middletown mining rezoning first came to public attention in April, 2006, O-N Mineral's own traffic impact analysis projected that industrial truck traffic on the area's narrow rural roads would soar to 1,305 dump trucks a day streaming through the heart of Middletown. That equals one dump truck per minute, 24 hours per day. Only after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected the mining rezoning in June, 2006, did O-N Minerals repudiate the traffic statement included in the original rezoning application. The company stopped talk- ing about expanding its operations and insisted new quarries would open, but truck traffic would barely grow. The proffer statement filed March 18, 2008 agrees to restrict truck traffic "to a maximum of 200 truck loads per day averaged over the prior 30 days through the scale house." But the trucks logged through the scale house are full, so this measure only counts the outbound truck trips. Therefore, if 200 trucks pass through the scale house each day, a total of 400 trucks actually will rumble in and out of Middletown. That is a huge increase over the number of trucks the company currently reports, from 50 to 70 through the scale house, or 100 to 140 a day. Page4 May The Frederick County g sentinel at Can YO T.T D o _ The Chemstone quarry rezoning in southern Frederick County could create a 1200 acre industrial mining corridor two-thirds of a mile wide and more than 2.6 miles long beside Cedar Creek, the National Historical Park and historic Middletown, like the one in Strasburg (above). Photo by Jeff Carter. MAKEY,O VOICE HEARD: ATTEND BOTH PUBLIC HEARINGS & TELL THEM WHAT YOU THIN JUNE 7: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7 pm, Frederick County Board Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester Contact Your Planning Commissioners Shawnee: June Wilmot (Chair) 540-678-0278 Opequon: Roger L. Thomas (w)540-665-4082 (h)869-4904 (Vice Chair) rthomas@visuallink.com At Large: H. Paige Mannuel (w)540-667-9794 (h)667-6831 hpm@visuallink.com Back Creek: Cordell Watt (w)540-858-3207 (h)858-2545 Back Creek: Greg L. Unger (w)540-869-2606 (h)722-4100 Gainesboro: George J. Kriz 540-667-1663 gkriz@visuallink.com Gainesboro: Charles E. Triplett (h)540-877-1380 (0533-0381 lwfarmC)shentel. net Opequon: Rick C. Ours (w)540-665-4931 (h)869-7231 rours@su.edu rours@adelphia. net Shawnee: Robert A. Morris 540'=869-1435 rmorris@shentel.net Stonewall: John Light (w)540-662-0323 (h)722-9394 Stonewall: Gary R. Oates (w)540-667-2001 (h)545-7823 OatesGR@aol. com Red Bud: Gregory S. Kerr (w)540-635-2000 (h)722-2089 gkerr@hallmechanical. net gkerrO2@adelphia.net Red Bud: Christopher Mohn (w)540-450-1241 (h)678-1366 cmohn @oakcrestbuilders. com BOS Liason: . Barbara Van Osten 540-667-7673 bosvanosten@aol.com BOS Alt.: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. 540-662-7421 cdehaven@crosslink.net BOS Alt: Philip A. Lemieux 540-722-3673 plemieux@visuallink.com JUNE 21: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING 7 pm, Frederick County Board Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 (h)667-2264 rshickle@shentel.net Back Creek: Barbara Van Osten 540-667-7673 bosvanosten@aol.com Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove 540-662-2734 garydove4@adelphia.net Opequon: Bill M. Ewing 540-869-5058 supervisorewing@yahoo.com Shawnee: Gene E. Fisher (h)540-662-5238 (w)665-4938 gfisher@visuallink.com Stonewall: Charles DeHaven 540-662-7421 cdehaven@crosslink.net Red. Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-722-3673 plemieux@visuallink.com SAMPLI`J ,ETTER: Write or E-r�&Al Your Elected Officials Dear Supervisor or Planning Commissioner I am writing to object to the request by ON -Minerals (Chemstone) to rezone a huge tract of land near Middletown from agricultural to Extractive Manufacturing uses, like mining, ce- ment and asphalt plants. These are totally unacceptable land uses next to three of the greatest assets our county has to offer — Cedar Creek, the National Historical Park and Middletown — or among the farms and homes of southern Frederick County. I understand the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is involved with this rezoning application as it has a lease agreement with Chemstone to store water on the site when mining has ceased. 1 don't believe we should sacrifice Middletown's distinctive resources or unique quality of life for a massive industrial site that the FCSA hopes will one day lead to water stor- age for the county. Mining and water are two separate issues that need to be separately and openly debated. I urge you to deny the Chemstone mining rezoning and open up the FCSA water plans for participa- tion and review by the general public so that water issues can be balanced with other issues. Frederick County must also update its comprehensive plan to address mining and related in- dustrial uses. Please provide the leadership we need to address both mining, water issues and quality of life in Frederick County. Sincerely yours, (Name & Address) •----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK ❑ Enclosed is my $ 50 tax-deductible gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick County.* ❑ Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the Frederick County Sentinel.* ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. E-mail address: Name: Street Address/PO Box: City/CtatP/7i n - Telephone Numbers: (Home/Work) (Cell) * Please make check payable to: PEC/Preserve Frederick Please mail to: Preserve Frederick, PO. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Or donate online: https://secure.groundspring.org/dn/index.php?aid=4127 Contact us at: preservefrederick@yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POSTAL CUSTOMER The Frederick County Sentinel Nonprofit Org US POSTAGE PAID Warrenton VA PERMIT NO 57 ECRWSS FREE Published by Preserve Frederick WE INFORM YOU DECIDE May 2006 INDUSTRIAL BELT PROPOSED AROUND MIDDLETOWN SHOULD FREDERICK COUNTY ACCEPT MORE DIRTY 4 INDUSTRY? Mining Expansion Would Generate ONE DUMP TRUCK PER MINUTE Through Historic Middletown 1,300 Trucks Per Day! } "Small town ambiance and tourism are key economic development strategies for Middletown. But the traffic, O-N Minerals/Chetnutone is seeking to triple the size of quarry operations and permit asphalt and cement plants and other industrial land uses next to the Cedar Creek 6- Belle Grove National Historical Park. CHEMSTONE SEEKS MASSIVE REZONING applied to Frederick County Earlier this month, the Middletown on the land to limestone mining and acquire major springs in the -N Minerals/Chemstone has opposition to the rezoning request. conditions to limit future activities In addition, the FCSA seeks to officials to rezone 6 9 acres Town Council voted unanimousl to rocessin According to the staff Middletown area —Blue S rin noise and visual impact of an expanded quarry can only erode 3 y processing. g Spring, from rural agriculture to mining and adopt a resolution in opposition to the report, "The scope of the impacts Hites Well and Vaucluse Spring —to the town's principal assets: industrial uses on two parcels beside rezoning. Middletown officials stated could exceed the projections identi- provide millions of gallons of water Cedar Creek, the National that an industrial corridor is in clear fied and accommodated in the per day. How will excavation of new Main Street, the National Historical Park, Middletown and conflict with the town's comprehen- impact statement." ■ quarries and major water with - many homes and farms in southern sive plan, which seeks to retain drawals from local springs affect the Historical Park and the rural Frederick County. Middletown's historic character and groundwater source (the aquifer) character surrounding the town. The rezoning would create a 1,261- quality of life through tourism and re- Mining Request that supports thousands of private acre industrial mining corridor lated small businesses. wells in Frederick County? An expanded quarry would two-thirds of a mile wide and more The Chemstone rezoning also con- Tied to County Finally, the Middletown quarry lies than 2.6 miles long. Impacts would flicts with Frederick County plans. within the Shenandoah River watershed. send a dump truck a minute include a tremendous increase in in- The properties surrounding the cur- Water Plan The topography of the site directs sur- through town, a total of 1,300 dustrial truck traffic, air pollution, rent mining operation are zoned rural face water toward Cedar Creek and the water pollution and changes to the areas or residential/agricultural. The Shenandoah River. No one knows what trucks per day. Is mining water table, noise and dust from lime- County has permitted several new he Frederick County diverting the natural flow of surface or stone mining and other industrial subdivisions near the mining opera- Sanitation Authority (FCSA) ground water will do to Cedar Creek. limestone more important than activities, and visual pollution from tion in the past decade, notably is supporting the Chemstone How will three new quarries impact growth in tourism or rural expanded mine waste piles. Westernview and Chimney Hills. rezoning application for an industri- Cedar Creek and the Shenandoah River, The Frederick County Planning Residents in these enclaves and al site near Middletown because the recently named the fifth most endan- businesses in and around Commission will consider the re- Middletown said they were given no agency signed an agreement with gered river in the nation? zoning at its June 7 meeting, while indications the county would permit Chemstone in 2000 to acquire These issues —the safety of lime - Middletown?" th B rd f S expanded mining near their homes quart its for water stora e after stone -art reservoirs the im acts e oa o upem rvrsors ay tk o e rt y p g q y p up at its June 21 meeting. P: - ; : - c Frederick County planners seem un- mining operations cease. The on local wells and the impact on Julie Clevenger Frederick is encouraging strong satrshect with the current Chemstone agreement between the FCSA and Cedar Creek and the Shenandoah Middletown public turnout at both meetings in rezoning request. In a staff report for Chemstone raises a host of River —have never been debated or the Planning Commission, dated troubling questions. discussed in a public forum. Middle- March 20, staff list a variety of issues that are not addressed in the applica- tion, such as a study of hydrogeology and impact of the project on local groundwater, and the impact of blast- ing and dust on adjacent residences. At a Planning Commission meeting April 5, commissioners noted the lack of clear remediation for local landowners whose wells could dry up due to water table changes. Planning staff expressed the need for caution regarding the wide-open nature of the rezoning request and residents are alarmed at the other in- dustrial uses that could be sited here along with the quarrying operation. The Extractive Manufacturing zon- ing category permits a range of related industrial uses. Frederick planners note that Chemstone has not offered proffer The FCSA currently operates former quarries as reservoirs at Clearbrook in northern Frederick County and Stephens City. Are Southern Frederick residents expected to accept a vast new industrial site in order to provide for a water plan that was created by a private agency, not in an open, public process? Other communities are rejecting the use of limestone quarries for reservoirs in karst geological areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has expe- rienced some problems with limestone quarries as water reser- voirs. Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? town area residents were not consulted when the FCSA signed its agreement with Chemstone, con- demning southern Frederick County to greatly expanded mining and other industrial extractive uses for a water plan devised outside a full and open public planning process. Preserve Frederick has called on the Frederick County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to separate the Chem - stone rezoning application from the promise of future water supplies. Just as county officials must finally out- line their policies toward expanded or new mining operations in Frederick, they must also offer the FCSA water plan for review by resi- dents and businesses, to ensure that water decisions don't conflict with other county goals. 0 e oa o upem rvrsors ay tk o e rt y p g q y p up at its June 21 meeting. P: - ; : - c Frederick County planners seem un- mining operations cease. The on local wells and the impact on Julie Clevenger Frederick is encouraging strong satrshect with the current Chemstone agreement between the FCSA and Cedar Creek and the Shenandoah Middletown public turnout at both meetings in rezoning request. In a staff report for Chemstone raises a host of River —have never been debated or the Planning Commission, dated troubling questions. discussed in a public forum. Middle- March 20, staff list a variety of issues that are not addressed in the applica- tion, such as a study of hydrogeology and impact of the project on local groundwater, and the impact of blast- ing and dust on adjacent residences. At a Planning Commission meeting April 5, commissioners noted the lack of clear remediation for local landowners whose wells could dry up due to water table changes. Planning staff expressed the need for caution regarding the wide-open nature of the rezoning request and residents are alarmed at the other in- dustrial uses that could be sited here along with the quarrying operation. The Extractive Manufacturing zon- ing category permits a range of related industrial uses. Frederick planners note that Chemstone has not offered proffer The FCSA currently operates former quarries as reservoirs at Clearbrook in northern Frederick County and Stephens City. Are Southern Frederick residents expected to accept a vast new industrial site in order to provide for a water plan that was created by a private agency, not in an open, public process? Other communities are rejecting the use of limestone quarries for reservoirs in karst geological areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has expe- rienced some problems with limestone quarries as water reser- voirs. Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? town area residents were not consulted when the FCSA signed its agreement with Chemstone, con- demning southern Frederick County to greatly expanded mining and other industrial extractive uses for a water plan devised outside a full and open public planning process. Preserve Frederick has called on the Frederick County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to separate the Chem - stone rezoning application from the promise of future water supplies. Just as county officials must finally out- line their policies toward expanded or new mining operations in Frederick, they must also offer the FCSA water plan for review by resi- dents and businesses, to ensure that water decisions don't conflict with other county goals. 0 March 20, staff list a variety of issues that are not addressed in the applica- tion, such as a study of hydrogeology and impact of the project on local groundwater, and the impact of blast- ing and dust on adjacent residences. At a Planning Commission meeting April 5, commissioners noted the lack of clear remediation for local landowners whose wells could dry up due to water table changes. Planning staff expressed the need for caution regarding the wide-open nature of the rezoning request and residents are alarmed at the other in- dustrial uses that could be sited here along with the quarrying operation. The Extractive Manufacturing zon- ing category permits a range of related industrial uses. Frederick planners note that Chemstone has not offered proffer The FCSA currently operates former quarries as reservoirs at Clearbrook in northern Frederick County and Stephens City. Are Southern Frederick residents expected to accept a vast new industrial site in order to provide for a water plan that was created by a private agency, not in an open, public process? Other communities are rejecting the use of limestone quarries for reservoirs in karst geological areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has expe- rienced some problems with limestone quarries as water reser- voirs. Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? town area residents were not consulted when the FCSA signed its agreement with Chemstone, con- demning southern Frederick County to greatly expanded mining and other industrial extractive uses for a water plan devised outside a full and open public planning process. Preserve Frederick has called on the Frederick County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to separate the Chem - stone rezoning application from the promise of future water supplies. Just as county officials must finally out- line their policies toward expanded or new mining operations in Frederick, they must also offer the FCSA water plan for review by resi- dents and businesses, to ensure that water decisions don't conflict with other county goals. 0 Page 2 Op1i11011 May 2006 Editorials Y Y f;< Vote on Mining.. Not on Water "Frederick County wants this," said one Middletown Council member May 8, not long before the council voted unanimously to adopt a resolution opposing a major industrial rezoning outside the historic town. This was three quarry pits, created by expanded mining, that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) hopes can one day be used as reservoirs. Future water storage is no justification to create an industrial mining belt around three of Frederick County's most revered resources: Cedar Creek, the Cedar Creek & Belle Grove National Historical Park and Middletown. Southern Frederick County residents should not be asked to accept the degradation of these assets and their quality of life because Frederick County has flawed planning and water policies. The limestone karst geology on the Middletown site runs like a belt through Frederick County and the Shenandoah Valley. There must be more logical places to mine limestone, locate asphalt and cement plants and sewage treatment facilities, and one day to store water. But Frederick County has never,. addressed appropriate sites for mining. Its comprehensive plan mentions the need to do so, but the work has not been done. The FCSA chose the Middletown site for water storage simply because there is a mine already in operation there. It was assumed mining could expand. Yet expansion conflicts with the existing land uses around the site, including new residential subdivisions approved in the past 10 years. It also conflicts with Middletown's comprehensive plan. The FCSA water plan involved no participation or review by the general public, in which water interests could be balanced with other issues. Frederick County officials cannot and should not approve an industrial mining rezoning in order to further an FCSA water plan that has received neither public scrutiny nor debate. Chemstone justifies its expansion by claiming mining has occurred there for 40 years. We would remind our industrial neighbor that the land has been honored as hallowed ground since the Battle of Cedar Creek 141 years ago. It has been farmed for 200 years. Limestone cliffs have towered over Cedar Creek for millennia. All deserve our careful stewardship. ■ May 20QQ Frederick's Third Battle Over Dirty Industry There was only one Battle of Cedar Creek, when General George Custer swept down on Confederate forces and put an end to their control of the Shenandoah Valley. Today, Cedar Creek is the focus of what might be called Frederick County's "Third Battle over Dirty Industry." Just five years ago, Frederick residents rose up in arms over the proposed Shockey Industrial Park in Stephenson. Plans called for tire manufacturing, handling of hazardous medical waste and other dangerous industrial uses on the 1,000-acre site. Elected officials wisely rejected the industrial rezoning request. Nearly 10 years ago, a similar outcry met the Cardinal Glass plan for a manufacturing plant near Kernstown that would emit significant air pollutants. After a tremendous public debate, Cardinal Glass withdrew to Roanoke. A year later, H.P. Hood opened a dairy processing plant on the site with little public comment. Today, the Chemstone quarry near Middletown wants a massive rezoning that would create an industrial belt - mining, cement and asphalt production, a sewage treatment plant - beside three of Frederick County's greatest natural, historic and cultural assets — Cedar Creek, the National Historical Park and Middletown. Frederick County officials need to reject the Chemstone rezoning. They need to make it clear that our county does not want to increase its share of polluting industrial uses. Let this be the last battle against degrading industrial uses that Frederick County residents fight in defense of their homes, businesses and towns. The Frederick County Sentinel Established 2606 An independent newspaper published by PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL Post Office Box 57, Warrenton VA 20188 PRESERVE FREDERICK www.shenandoahvalleynetwork.org/PreserveFrederick.html perservefrederick@yahoo.com Post Office Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Preserve Frederick is a grassroots campaign to promote compatible development that will strengthen our communities and preserve the rural character in Frederick County. Our fiscal agent is the Piedmont Environmental Council, a 30-year-old non-profit organization dedicated to promoting and protecting the Piedmont's rural economy, natural resources, history and beauty. The Frederick County ISientinel Cedar Creek: A Rare Jewel The Potomac Conservancy began a study of the ecological diversity of the Cedar Creek watershed in partnership with Shenandoah University in 2004. Although we knew intuitively that the creek and its watershed were special, the results of that study brought home the unique and varied natural communities that inhabit Cedar Creek and the lands surrounding it. In the Middletown area, the team from Shenandoah University reported finding several rare plant communities along the limestone cliffs that are unique to Cedar Creek. Globally -imperiled plant species call this area home, as do an exceptional assemblage of limestone -loving plants. With a long agricultural history and imminent development encroaching on the northern Shenandoah Valley, the limestone cliffs that tower over Cedar Creek are increasingly rare, and therefore important to protect. The life that thrives within the creek is h' o less diverse. With help from the staff of the state Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, -the research team identified 21 fish species, including sensitive fish, such as stonerollers and madtoms, and popular game species, like smallmouth bass. Cedar Creek is widely regarded - by state agencies, citizen monitoring groups and independent researchers - as one of the cleanest streams in the Shenandoah Valley. High water quality coupled with a diversity of plant and animal species makes this creek a rare jewel worth protecting. Potomac Conservancy has been working for several years with landowners throughout the Cedar Creek watershed, to help them protect their land from development and the creek from pollution. We are now on the verge of permanently protecting hundreds of acres and several miles of frontage on Cedar Creek through the hard work and dedication of landowners who love their land and their creek. Frederick County has an opportunity to choose its future. Will it protect the streams and species that make it a natural treasure or will it select a path of short-term exploitation and degradation? Landowners who live, work and play along the creek have clearly expressed their desire to ensure that Cedar Creek remains a clean, diverse and healthy ecological community, so how can the county do any less? ■ Heather Richards, Winchester The Potomac Conservancy Photo: Mark Brown 'The Department of Conservation and Recreation has identified Cedar Creek as, a po- tential component of the State's scenic rivers system. And both DCR and the Virginia Department of Transportation have recently determined that U.S. Route i 1 qualifies for designation as a Scenic Byway. It is my hope that County officials consider these items as they contemplate the quarry and its potential impacts on the regions signif- icant scenic, natural and cultural resources." a L. Preston Bryant Virginia Secretary of Natural Resources Letter dated April 26, 2006 in response to one from Middletown resident to Governor Tim Kaine Photos: Mark Brown Virginia Scenic Byway designa- tion. That status, a key part of local tourism plans, would be se- verely compromised by 1,300 trucks, a dump truck a minute, rumbling down the corridor to Strasburg or north to I-81. ■ See Page 4 for help in f • YOUR voice heard, Wan EN CREATING the Cedar Creek d Belle Grove National Historical Park, the U.S. Congress determined, "The Battle of Cedar Creek was a major event of the Civil War and the history of this country. It represented the end of the Civil War's Shenandoah Valley campaign of 1864 and contributed to the reelection of President Abraham Lincoln and the eventual outcome of the war." The park was created, in part, because "the panoramic views of the mountains, natu- ral areas and waterways provide visitors with an in- spiring setting of great natural beauty," according to Congress. "The historic, nat- ural, cultural, military and scenic resources found in the Cedar Creek Battlefield and Belle Grove Plantation areas are nationally and regionally significant." The National Park Service has noted that, "What makes Cedar Creek Battlefield un- like many National Park Service units or other battle- field sites" is its connection to the land and communities around it. "No other National Park Service units or protected areas provide an opportunity to protect and interpret important battle re- sources within the context of such a large, historic land- scape. Frederick County has already approved more than 1,000 acres of acres of land for mining by Chemstone and others. Society needs limestone and its products, but the region has given and continues to give its share on existing mining sites. Tripling the industrial use of the Cedar Creek area for min- ing is an unacceptable sacrifice that is incompatible with the sacrifices made long ago on this hallowed ground. ■ The Frederick County 50eMay 2006 Page 3 1rtrtirnel 9 I a� is p Rezoning Covers Many Industrial Land Uses hemstone's rezoning re- quest near Middletown for extractive manufac- turing allows multiple other industrial uses: concrete and as- phalt manufacturing, crushed stone operations, brick, block and pre -cast concrete produc- tion, oil and gas extraction, mining and processing sand and gravel, sewage treatment, and public utilities. There is nothing in Chemstone's rezoning applica- tion to limit these uses on the 639 acres. Sections will likely be sold off for heavy industrial uses. Chemstone sold two parcels at its Clearbrook oper- ation in northern Frederick County and two cement com- panies opened nearly two years ago. Together, they gen- erate an additional 110 new industrial truck trips on local roads per day. Rezoning would permit many in- dustral uses, like those at the Strasburg plant (above). There is nothing in Chemstone� rezoning application to limit these uses on the 639 acres. Expanded operations at quarries are part of an indus- try trend. Construction Monthly magazine reports that quarry owners want to provide one stop shopping at industrial centers for con- struction aggregate users. These sites contain the quar- ry, asphalt plants and different kinds of concrete plants. The Chemstone in- dustrial site in Strasburg is a prime example. ■ Do your part to Preserve Frederick — see Page 4 for ideas TRUCK TRAFFIC: A Battlefield A DumpTruck A Minute Ringed by Mining Waste Chemstone says its expansion will lead to 1,300 trucks through Middletown each day. That's a dump truck a minute! HEMSTONE'S own traffic analysts project that expanded quarry operations on " the site will triple industrial truck traffic on the area's narrow rural roads and send 1,305 dump trucks a day streaming through the 'heart of Middletown. That equals one dump truck per minute, 24 hours per day, through the historic town. The paXticulate matter (or diesel soot) released by one heavy industry dump truck is equal to 395 cars. Multiply that by the additional 800 heavy trucks generated by quarry expansion. It is the e- quivalent of 316,000 cars per day through Middletown and southern Frederick County. Multiply that again by the ad- ditional trucks generated by other users of the site, such as cement and asphalt plants and concrete block manufacturers. These heavy trucks will be Route 11, from Reliance south traveling winding, narrow through Middletown and on to rural roads with no shoulders Strasburg, has been selected for or center lines. The 500 trucks now traveling to the existing quarry site already conflict with other road users; school buses, horse and cattle trailers, tractors, bicyclists and walkers. The miniscule amount of economic growth the quarry expansion will bring to the county will not outweigh the negative effects it would have on other businesses and tax paying citizens. And, by disguising a strip mine operation as a way to secure a more plentiful water supply, elected officials are not being up front with the people who put them in office in the first place. This 'Band-Aid' is not the right way to go about securing more water." Middletown Town Council Resolution: DENY CURRENT REZONING APPLICATION WHEREAS, O-N Minerals (Chemstone) has filed an appli- cation in Frederick County to rezone 639 acres from agricul- tural to extractive manufacturing uses on a site west of the Town of Middletown, which was desig- nated as the official Gateway to the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park; and WHEREAS, the Chemstone quarry site is adjacent to the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park, re- cently designated as one of the ten most endangered Civil War battlefields in America, and clearly within the viewshed of the town of Middletown; and WHEREAS, increased lime- stone mining at the Chem - stone site will have significant negative environmental im- pacts on the Middletown area, notably increased air pollution emissions, pollution of groundwater supplies, and erosion of the historic and rural setting of the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park; and WHEREAS, increased lime- stone mining is projected to create significant negative traf- fic and noise impacts, with up to 1,400 industrial vehicles traveling through the Town of Middletown each day, which amounts to nearly one truck per minute, 24-hours a day, seven days a week; and WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning would permit other related heavy industries to lo- cate on the site, such as cement or asphalt plant, as has occurred on the Chemstone quarry site at Clearbrook in northern Frederick County, where two cement plants have opened in the past 18 months, adding to air pollution from small particulates; and WHEREAS, the 2005 Middletown Comprehensive Plan, calls for retaining the community's character by more fully developing Main Street "with more shopping and eat- ing establishments" and for retaining Route 11 as a "major arterial roadway" that is also "a historic, pedestrian -friendly Main Street," and WHEREAS, the 2005 Middletown Comprehensive Plan seeks to build upon the town's major economic re- sources, Lord Fairfax Community College, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park, the Wayside Theater, the small-town charac- ter and the pedestrian -friendly environment; and WHEREAS, the 2005 Middletown Comprehens- ive Plan calls for the town and county to identify and develop economic opportuni- Jennifer Kohler Middletown ties that are unique to Middle -town, including com- patible commerce and light industry, in order to broaden the local tax base; and WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning of 639 acres from a- gricultural to heavy industrial uses close to town will gener- ate air, water, traffic, noise and dust impacts that are clearly not compatible with the Town of Middletown's e- conomic development and other community goals; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Middletown Town Council hereby calls on the Frederick County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to deny the applica- tion for rezoning of the O-N Minerals (Chemstone) site in its current form. Adopted this 8th day of May, 2006. Gene Dicks, Mayor Page 4 May 2006 The Frederick County ', ' 8entir�el a�t Can �YOZT �o _ The Chemstone quarry rezoning in southern Frederick County could create a 1,200 acre industrial mining corridor two-thirds of a mile wide and more than 2.6 miles long beside Cedar Creek, the National Historical Park and historic Middletown, like the one in Strasburg (above). Photo by jeff Carter. MAKE, YOUR VOICE HEARD: ATTEND BOTH PUBLIC HEARINGS & TELL THEM WHAT YOU THINK JUNE 7: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7 pm, Frederick County Board Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester Contact Your Planning Commissioners Shawnee: June Wilmot (Chair) 540-678-0278 Opequon: Roger L. Thomas (w)540-665-4082 (Vice Chair) At Large: H. Paige Mannuel (w) 540-667-9794 Back Creek: Cordell Watt (w)540-858-3207 Back Creek: Greg L. Unger (w) 540-869-2606 Gainesboro: George J. Kriz 540-667-1663 Gainesboro: Charles E. Triplett (h)540-877-1380 Opequon: Rick C. Ours (w)540-665-4931 rours@su.edu Shawnee: Robert A. Morris 540-869-1435 Stonewall: John Light (w) 540-662-0323 Stonewall: Gary R. Oates (w)540-667-2001 Red Bud: Gregory S. Kerr (w)540-635-2000 gkerr@hallmechanical. net Red Bud: Christopher Mohn (w)540-450-1241 BOS Liason: ' Barbara Van Osten 540-667-7673 BOS Alt.: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. 540-662-7421 BOS Alt: Philip A. Lemieux 540-722-3673 (h) 869-4904 rthomas@visuallink.com (1) 667-6831 hpm @visuallink. com (1)858-2545 (z)722-4100 gkriz@visuallink. com (0533-0381 lwfarm@shentel.net (h) 869-7231 rours@adelphia. net rmorris@shentel. net (h)722-9394 0545-7823 OatesGR@aol.com (h)722-2089 gkerr02@adelphia. net SAMPLE LETTER: Write or E-Mail Your Elected Officials Dear Supervisor or Planning Commissioner , I am writing to object to the request by ON -Minerals (Chemstone) to rezone a huge tract of land near Middletown from agricultural to Extractive Manufacturing uses, like mining, ce- ment and asphalt plants. These are totally unacceptable land uses next to three of the greatest assets our county has to offer — Cedar Creek, the National Historical Park and Middletown — or among the farms and homes of southern Frederick County. I understand the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is involved with this rezoning application as it has a lease agreement with Chemstone to store water on the site when mining has ceased. I don't believe we should sacrifice Middletown's distinctive resources or unique quality of life for a massive industrial site that the FCSA hopes will one day lead to water stor- age for the county. Mining and water are two separate issues that need to be separately and openly debated. I urge you to deny the Chemstone mining rezoning and open up the FCSA water plans for participa- tion and review by the general public so that water issues can be balanced with other issues. Frederick County must also update its comprehensive plan to address mining and related in- dustrial uses. Please provide the leadership we need to address both mining, water issues and quality of life in Frederick County. (h) 678-1366 cmohn@oakcrest'puilders.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- bosvanosten@aol.com i 11YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK cdehaven@crosslink.net plemieux@visuallink.com 1❑ Enclosed is my $50 tax-deductible gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick County.* ■ ; ❑ Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the JUNE 2'1 ■ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING ; pp Frederick County Sentinel.* 7 pm, Frederick County Board Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 (h)667-2264 rshiekle@shentel. net Back Creek: Barbara Van Osten 540-667-7673 bosvanosten@aol.com Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove 540-662-2734 garydove4@adelphia.net Opequon: Bill M. Ewing 540-869-5058 supervisorewing@yahoo.com Shawnee: Gene E. Fisher (h)540-662-5238 (w)665-4938 g fisher@visuallink. com Stonewall: Charles DeHaven 540-662-7421 cdehaven@crosslink.net Red Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-722-3673 plemieux@visuallink.com E-mail address: I Name: Street Address/PO Box: City/State/Zir): Telephone Numbers: I (Home/Work) (Cell) * Please make check payable to: PEC/Preserve Frederick Please mail to: Preserve Frederick, P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Or donate online: https://secure.groundspring.org/dn/index.php?aid=4127 Contact us at: preservefrederickQyahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POSTAL CUSTOMER The Frederick County Sentinel Nonprofit Org US POSTAGE PAID Warrenton VA PERMIT NO 57 ECRWSS FREE Published by Preserve Frederick WE INFORM —YOU DECIDE May 2006 INDUSTRIAL BELT PROPOSED AROUND MIDDLETOWN SHOULD FREDERICK COUNTY ACCEPT MORE DIRTY INDUSTRY? Mining Expansion Would Generate ONE DUMP TRUCK PER MINUTE Through Historic Middletown 1,300 Trucks Per Day! O-N Minerals/Chemstone is seeking to triple the size of quarry operations and permit asphalt and cement plants and other industrial land; uses next to the _ "Small town ambiance and Cedar. Creek 6- Belle Grove National Historical Park. tourism are key economic development strategies for CHEMSTONE SEEKS MASSIVE REZONING Middletown. But the traffic, -N Minerals/Chemstone has opposition to the rezoning request. conditions to limit future activities In addition, the FCSA seeks to noise and visual impact of an 0 applied to Frederick County Earlier this month, the Middletown on the land to limestone mining and acquire major springs in the expanded quarry can only erode officials to rezone 639 acres Town Council voted unanimously to processing. According to the staff "The Middletown area —Blue Spring, from rural agriculture to mining and adopt a resolution in opposition to the report, scope of the impacts Hites Well and Vaucluse Spring —to the town's principal assets: industrial uses on two parcels beside rezoning. Middletown officials stated could exceed the projections identi- provide millions of gallons of water Cedar Creek, the National that an industrial corridor is in clear fied and accommodated in the per day. How will excavation of new Main Street, the National Historical Park, Middletown and conflict with the town's comprehen- impact statement." ■ quarries and major water with - Historical Park and the rural many homes and farms in southern sive plan, which seeks to retain drawals from local springs affect the Frederick County. The rezoning 1,261- Middletown's historic character and quality of life through tourism and re- MiningRe Request groundwater source (the aquifer) that character surrounding the town. l; would create a q supports thousands of private PP An acre industrial mining corridor lated small businesses. The Chemstone Tied to County wells in Frederick County? expanded quarry would two-thirds of a mile wide and more rezoning also con- Finally, the Middletown quarry lies send a dump track a minute than 2.6 miles long. Impacts would flicts with Frederick County plans. The Water Plan within the Shenandoah River watershed. include a tremendous increase in in- properties surrounding the cur- The topography of the site directs sur- through town, a total of 1,300 dustrial 'truck traffic, air pollution, rent mining operation are zoned rural face water toward Cedar Creek and the water pollution and changes to the areas or residential/agricultural. The Shenandoah River. No one knows what trucks per day. Is mining water table, noise and dust from lime- County has permitted several new he Frederick County diverting' the natural flow of surface or limestone more important than stone mining and other industrial subdivisions near the mining opera- Sanitation Authority (FCSA) ground water. will do to Cedar Creek. activities, and visual pollution from tion in the past decade, notably is supporting the Chemstone How will three new quarries impact growth in tourism or rural expanded mine waste piles. Westernview and Chimney Hills. rezoning application for an industri- Cedar Creek and the Shenandoah River, The Frederick County Planning Residents in these enclaves and al site near Middletown because the recently named the fifth most endan- businesses in and around Commission will consider the re- Middletown said they were given no agency signed an agreement with gered river in the nation? zoning at its June 7 meeting, while indications the county would permit Chemstone in 2000 to acquire These issues —the safety of lime - Middletown?"" the Board of Supervisors may take it expanded mining near their homes. quarry pits for water storage after stone quarry reservoirs, the impacts Julie Clevenger up at its June 21 meeting. Preserve Frederick County planners seem un- mining operations cease. The on local wells and the impact on Frederick is encouraging strong satisfied with the current Chemstone agreement between the FCSA and Cedar Creek and the Shenandoah Middletown public turnout at both meetings in rezoning request. In a staff report for Chemstone raises a host of River —have never been debated or the Planning Commission, dated troubling questions. discussed in a public forum. Middle - March 20, staff list a variety of issues that are not addressed in the applica- tion, such as a study of hydrogeology and impact of the project on local groundwater, and the impact of blast- ing and dust on adjacent residences. At a Planning Commission meeting April 5, commissioners noted the lack of clear remediation for local landowners whose wells could dry up due to water table changes. Planning staff expressed the need for caution regarding the wide-open nature of the rezoning request and residents are alarmed at the other in- dustrial uses that could be sited here along with the quarrying operation. The Extractive Manufacturing zon- ing category permits a range of related industrial uses. Frederick planners note that Chemstone has not offered proffer The FCSA currently operates former quarries as reservoirs at Clearbrook in northern Frederick County and Stephens City. Are Southern Frederick residents expected to accept a vast new industrial site in order to provide for a water plan that was created by a private agency, not in an open, public process? Other communities are rejecting the use of limestone quarries for reservoirs in karst geological areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has expe- rienced some problems with limestone quarries as water reser- voirs. Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? town area residents were not consulted when the FCSA signed its agreement with Chemstone, con- demning southern Frederick County to greatly expanded mining and other industrial extractive uses for a water plan devised outside a full and open public planning process. Preserve Frederick has called on the Frederick County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to separate the Chem - stone rezoning application from the promise of future water supplies. Just as county officials must finally out- line their policies toward expanded or new mining operations in Frederick, they must also offer the FCSA water plan for review by resi- dents and businesses, to ensure that water decisions don't conflict with other county coals. ■ li. POSTAL CUSTOMER April 20o8 GET -INVOLVED The Frederick Sentinel Is this the Future of Southern Frederick County? Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 rshickle@shentel.net (h)540-667-2264 Back Creek: Gary Lofton 540-869-1972 gary@garylofton.org Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove Opequon: Bill M. Ewing Shawnee: Gene E. Fisher 540-662-2734 540-869-5058 (h)540-662-5238 (w)540-665-4938 Stonewall: Charles DeHaven 540-662-7421 Red Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-722-3673 garydove4@comcast.net supervisorewing@yahoo.com gfisher@visuallink.com cdehavein@crosslink.net plemieux@visuallink.com Planning Commissioners Speak Out "Fundamentally, as a land -use issue, the time for the expansion of this quarry and the industrial use of these particular properties is frankly passed." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Christopher Mohn, June 7, 2006 "I know of absolutely nothing - I can conceive of nothing - that can be proffered that would make this an acceptable rezoning for me. — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Robert Morris, June 7, 2006 "When you.have that many questions, and that many concerns, it would seem to belie that there is something not quite right about this.. This is, a square peg trying to be jammed into a round hole." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Rick C. Ours, June 7, 2006 j-----------------------------------------------------------------------------1 YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK ❑ Enclosed is my $50 tax-deductible* gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick County. ❑ Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the Frederick County Sentinel. ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. I E-mail address: i Name: i I , Street Address/PO Box: I , City/State/Zip: ' I I I Telephone Number: (Home/Work) (Cell) Please make check payable to: Preserve Frederick, P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Contact us at: preservefrederick@yahoo.com ' * Preserve Frederick is recognized by the IRS as a non-profit charitable organization. Gifts are tax deductible as allowed by law. ' I , I , L-------'----------------------------------------------------------------------J 0 THE FREDERICK COUNTY \rTJ 1,11iff I. Winchester, VA I I Permit No. 102 ECRWSS Ti PUBLISHED BY PRESERVE FREDERICK April 2008 FiEE WE INFORM — YOU DECIDE Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAI D Massive Mining Corridor Proposed Around Middletown Nearly two years after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected an application to greatly expand limestone mining near Middletown, the county Board of Supervisors will consider the request at a public hearing April 23. O-N Minerals Company is seek- ing to rezone 639 acres from rural agriculture to industrial mining on two parcels adjacent to its existing mining operations. The rezoning would double existing mine opera- tions and create a 1,261-acre indus- trial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and about two-thirds of a mile wide adjacent to the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park and historic Middletown. The enormous size of the rezon- ing is little changed since it was filed in June, 2005. O-N Minerals executives last year rejected an alternative plan from Preserve Frederick to reduce the scale of the project, better balance mining expansion with community con- cerns and lessen the impacts on the southern Frederick community. Conflicts with Local Plans & Land Uses O-N Minerals seeks to rezone 639 acres to create an industrial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and two-thirds mile wide next to historic Middletown and the National Historical Park. The tremendous expansion of limestone mining conflicts with the al: In the past 15 years, new subdivi- bridge over Cedar Creek to divert on March 18, 2008. O-N Minerals The Board of Supervisors will Frederick County and Middletown sions, notably Westernview and mining trucks from Middletown and continues to demand a mammoth consider the mining rezoning on Comprehensive Plans and other Chimney Hills, were created near an archeological survey of core bat- expansion with little more than April 23 at 7 pm at the County local economic development efforts. the parcels up for rezoning., But res- tlefield areas and the Nieswander Fort berms to buffer the surrounding Government Center, 107 North Kent Impacts would include an increase idents in these enclaves and site on the property. community from the impacts. Street, Winchester. in industrial truck traffic, air pollu- Middletown said they were given no Deputy Planning Director tion, water pollution and changes to indication the county would permit Michael T. Ruddy wrote Thomas M. the water table, noise and dust from expanded mining near their homes. Lawson, O-N Minerals local attor- • • limestone mining, and visual pollu- Frederick County planners offered ney, a letter on September 8, 2006, to tion from expanded mine waste many recommendations to improve suggest that "limiting the potential Mining Re piles. the rezoning request. A January 3, acreage of development ... would The properties surrounding the 2006 letter from planner Candice E. limit the potential impacts" of • current mining operation are zoned Perkins sought to reduce the impact expanded mining. 1 e „ t 0Water Plan rural areas or residential/agricultur- on historic resources by calling for a O-N Land at Cedar Creek F - ®, Proposed Mining L. Corridor N MWProposed Rezoning Current Mining Operation National Park 0 0.5 Proposed Industrial Mining Corridor SHENANDOAH If Data source: Frederick County, VDCR. Although O. s have been made to verify data, accuracy is not guaranteed Alternative Plan The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is paying for the O-N Rejected 7 Minerals rezoning application for expanded mining near Middletown. The agency agreed to do so when it signed an agreement in 2000 to acquire the com- pany's quarry pits for water storage after mining operations cease. This agree - The Frederick County Planning ment between the FCSA and O-N Minerals raises a host of troubling questions. Commission voted 8 to 4 to reject Why does the FCSA need three new quarry pits from the rezoning, when it the mining rezoning request in June, could simply use the existing quarry pit at Strasburg to store water? At a com- 2006. After waiting for action for munity meeting in Middletown April 2, O-N Minerals General Manager more than a year, Preserve Frederick Spencer C. Stinson said the Strasburg quarry holds "a billion gallons of water." sent O-N Minerals an alternative Must Southern Frederick residents accept a vast new mining corridor to mining plan. complete a water plan created by a private agency, with no public comment ThP alternative plan provided for or support? The FCSA water plan, the lease agreement with O-N Minerals expanded mining on a smaller scale and the rezoning, for expanded mining were not debated in 2000. Area res- in an area already greatly affected by idents were not given a chance to discuss the wisdom of expanded mining the existing mine operations. Other near a national park and historic town in return for public water storage, a measures would have protected nat- need that could be better met by other options. ural and historic resources, diverted Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such truck traffic and addressed noise, air reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? Other, and water impacts much more thor- communities are rejecting limestone quarries as reservoirs in karst geolog oughly than the steps O-N Minerals ical areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to outlined in its proffers to the county. easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has experienced In a personal letter sent to the com- some water quality problems in limestone quarries used as reservoirs at pany in September, 2007, Board of Stephen's City and Clearbrook. Supervisors Chairman Richard C. Shickle asked the company "to review Company Changes Hands - Again and seriously consider the , plan `Preserve Frederick' has sent to you." The mining rezoning was filed in June 2005 by the Chemstone While the company acknowl- Company, also known as O-N Minerals, a division of Oglebay Norton, edged receipt of the Preserve based in Cleveland, Ohio. Now, a foreign corporation, Carmeuse Lime & Stone of Belgium, Frederick alternative plan, all key elements were left out of the final has purchased Oglebay Norton Corporation of Ohio, including the Middletown mining operation, in a deal completed earlier this year. proffer statement sent to the county n April2oo8 OPINION The Frederick Sentinel The Frederick Sentinel IMPACTS April 2oo8 EDITORIALS Time to,. Deny Mine Expansion The O-N Minerals request to double the size of its limestone mining operation at Middletown will have dragged on for nearly three years by the time it arrives before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on April 23. During that time, the company has never given an inch on the enormous scale of the project. Last summer, Preserve Frederick offered the company an alternative plan. It called for rezoning 158 acres to the south of the existing quar- ry, where impacts from current operations already intrude on the land- scape. Our plan would have kept mining going for another 30 plus years, while protecting valued historic and natural resources and easing the traffic, noise, dust and water impacts on the local community. We received some criticism for offering an alternative plan for min- ing. But we recognized that O-N Minerals has options that could be exercised with fewer impacts on the Middletown community. In return, the company has never offered to scale back, even slightly, the over- sized plans it announced in 2005. O-N Minerals unwillingness to adjust its property interests to address the community's concerns is a compelling reason to end the long drama over mining in Middletown. We ask to supervisors to vote no on April 23. Vote No on Mining, Not Yes on Water / THE FREDERICK COUNTY Established 2006 An independent newspaper published by Preserve Frederick '11;ZL Preserve Frederick www.PreserveFrederick.org preservefrederick@yahoo.com P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Preserve Frederick promotes compatible development that strengthens our communities, protects our historic and natural resources and preserves the rural character of Frederick County. Company Can't Keep Company Proffers Facts Straight Fall Far Short There they go again. O-N Minerals can't resist making big claims that, on close examination, just aren't true. Among the whoppers we've been collecting since 2006, consider: "We aren't expanding the mine operation." "This land is not part of the core, area of the Cedar Creek -battlefield." "The county promised to rezone our land back in 1980.11 Mining Operations to Double "There has been a false impres- sion that this rezoning will somehow `expand' the Middletown quarry. But we will continue to operate at the same pace, with the same people, the same number of trucks," O-N Minerals' Joe Ferrell told the Winchester Star back in October, 2006. 1�. Maybe we got that "false impres- sion" from the fact that the words "expand" and "expansion" are used in the mining rezoning application no less than six times. Or from the company's own website, which states that its local operations have "a commitment to expand produc- tion to meet growing market demands." O-N Minerals currently mines limestone in one quarry pit on about 622 acres it leases from Genstar Corp. With the rezoning, O-N plans to create three new quarry pits on land it owns outright; one to the south of existing operations and two to the north,, on. either side of Chapel' Road. The company goes on to claim that only 12 percent of the land it owns will be quarried. What it does- n't say is that behind the proposed berms and buffers, 639 acres now zoned for farms, forest and limited homesites will be subject to all the industrial activities associated with mining; earthmoving, blasting and storing piles of "overburden," the soil and rock leftover once limestone is extracted. O-N is asking to double the size of limestone mining operations at Middletown, to a total of 1,261 acres on a corridor 2.6 miles long. Sure sounds like an expansion to us. Property Within Battlefield Core, Area O-N Minerals officials deny that the land they want to rezone was ever an important part of the Battle of Cedar Creek. They insist that "lit- tle fighting occurred on this land, aside from troop movements" on the 533 acre parcel divided by Chapel Road. Not so. While the land may not lie within the National Historical Park bound- ary, the property is shown clearly within the core area of the battle - field, established in 1992 by the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. This three-year study of the Valley's battlefields, mandated by Congress, was based on historical records, surveys, maps and other resources. Indeed, the study refers specifi- cally to the importance of the land threatened by expanded mining: "If lolli continued north another half mile, this quarrying will eradicate the ruins of 18th-century Nieswander's Fort, site of Merritt's bivouac and George A. Custer's decisive flanking attack against John B. Gordon." Frederick County officials tried to correct the company. A January 3, 2006 letter from the Department of Planning and Development to the late! ;Q44,; .Maddox; : consultant to O-N Minerals, noted that the map "shows a portion of the property as being located within the core battle- field." No Promise Given for Rezoning O-N Minerals executives insist they have a decades -old commit- ment from Frederick County to rezone the property from agricultur- al to extractive manufacturing land uses. They point to a letter dated April 7, 1980 and signed by John R. Riley, then Frederick County Director of Planning and now the County Administrator. At the time, the county was updating its Comprehensive Plan and the property was owned by U.S. Steel Corporation. Riley, wrote that "Frederick County will not consider the 542 acres ... during tpq,, compre- hensive rezoning proposal for Frederick County." He continued, "The Planning Commission recognizes the intent of U.S. Steel Corporation to eventually mine this property," but "would only consider a rezoning from an agricul- tural zone to an. EM zone on an indi- vidual petition basis." U.S. Steel never filed a mining rezoning in the 1980s. The land has r1mained zoned for agriculture ever since. Historic Resources on . O-N Land at Cedar Creek National Park Proposed Rezoning N A Current Mining Operation r = =t Proposed Mining Corridor Battle of Cedar Creek '� w Confederate Troops 4 ., = Movements and PositionsTWO ,«- Federal Troop ' — r Movements and Positions j A Federal Camps 0 0.25 0.5 I I (Miles }{ :+ Dets source: Frededck County, VDCR. Although axone have been made to verdty date, eccurecy is not guaranteed `' O-N Minerals application to tions will be given to historic rezone 639 acres in two parcels resources and that the company hasn't changed much in nearly specifically name the recipient of three years. Not only has the com- an eight acre historic reserve to be pany failed to reduce the size of the donated to a preservation group. rezoning by a single acre, its final The company has only agreed to proffer statement, a legally binding protect two cemeteries, not the list of restrictions, fails to provide archeological remains of the detail on protection and Nieswander Fort or any other enforcement that county staff have structures or battlefield resources., requested again and again. It did not name "the -recipient of tlie' The clearest picture of how little reserve. has changed is evident in the September 8, 2006 letter from Truck Traffic county Deputy Planning Director Michael T. Ruddy to O-N Minerals Mr. Ruddy requested the com- attorney, Thomas M. Lawson, pany address the potential impacts commenting on a proffer statement associated with an increase of min - dated August 23, 2006. Most of the ing trucks on, streets in county `s concerns remain unad- Middletown. There is no evidence dressed in the final proffer state- in the latest proffer statement that ment submitted March 18, 2008. the impacts were studied. Size of project Groundwater/Dust Control/Blasting Controls Mr. Ruddy suggested that "lim- iting the potential acreage of devel- opment ... would limit the poten- tial impacts" of expanded mining on the community. The company never reduced the scale of the rezoning. Enforcement Mr. Ruddy expressed concern that the county could end up responsible for enforcing problems with neighbors' wells and struc- tures caused by expanded mining. The company offered to hire inde- pendent firms to conduct "surveys of wells and structures prior to new mining and after problems are reported. But those firms would be paid by O-N Minerals to assess the company's own damage and liabil- ity, a sure source of conflict with neighboring landowners. Such conflicts inevitably end up before county officials. Historic resources Mr. Ruddy recommended that the company address what protec- Mr. Ruddy wrote that "An alternative approach for the appli- cation and proffer statement may be to seek to better understand the potential impacts associated with the proposed mining -operations and seek to avoid them by refining the potential I scope of mining operation." There has been no change in the size and scope of the rezoning. t Proffers That Aren't Really Proffers Mr. Ruddy noted that the com- pany was offering to give up, by proffer, things already required by county rules, other agencies or existing contracts. These include: creating distance buffers to block views of the mining operation, con- trolling dust on the site, adhering to state limits on mining noise and lighting, maintaining a state air permit and granting water rights to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The company did not remove these items from its final proffer statement. Radical Plan Would Phase Expansion In the final proffer statement, O-N Minerals offered an untested plan to phase the opening of new limestone quarries over 30 years. It calls for mining to begin immediately after the rezoning on the parcel south of the existing mining operation, to start 10 years after the rezoning on the par- cel north of the existing mine and south of Chapel Road and to start 20 years after the rezoning on the parcel north of Chapel Road. Company officials admitted the concept was "revolutionary" when asked about it at a community meeting in Middletown April 2. In fact, it is unheard of in the Commonwealth of Virginia. O-N Minerals' own attor- ney admitted that not one other county in the state had ever agreed to an industrial land use rezoning with a timetable for phasing the develop- ment. Local governments traditionally do not want to tie the hands of future decision -makers. When a county designates an area for industrial or com- mercial land uses in its comprehensive plan, land use map and zoning ordinances, it encourages these land uses in the present or near future. Longer term goals are adapted as community needs change. In Virginia, phased development has only been applied to large resi- dential and commercial rezoning applications. By setting a timetable for when new houses, offices and shops will be built, both the developers and county officials can coordinate the roads, schools, water, sewer and other services the project will need. Preserve Frederick Crafted Option for, Rezoning In August 2007, Preserve Frederick sent O-N Minerals a rea- sonable alternative to the company's Mining Rezoning Alternative Plan massive expansion of limestone mining at Middletown. The alterna- tive would have greatly reduced the / impacts of mining on the rural and i historic landscape and quality of life u r r„�M� g in Southern Frederick County. S '"�, n p ra i n� Preserve Frederick hired land use i planner John Hutchinson, principal �ti0 m in the Jennings Gap Partnership in Staunton, to help develop the alter- • • • • :;:�., native. H e studied the rezoning v request, the limestone seam in the /�y�. � ." : area, the natural and historic resources on the property up for rezoning, and recommendations`` from Frederick County planning Buffer staff on ways to reduce the impacts of the rezoning. The Preserve Frederick plan pS r �� y would have provided for expanded Y mining on the site for at least 30 0 500 1,000 = �_ i Feet years, while preserving nearly all of £{ the historic battlefield resources, . protecting the natural resources on called for rezoning the158-acre par- chairman of the county Board of Cedar Creek and providing a signif- cel on the southern end, which is Supervisors, Richard C. Shickle. icant buffer against noise, dust and adjacent to the existing mining oper- The chairman subsequently wrote traffic impacts for the neighbors. ation and already visually impacted to O-N Minerals, asking it to A critical element was to shrink by it. "review and seriously consider the the proposed expansion. Specif- Preserve Frederick shared its plan `Preserve Frederick' sent to ically, the Preserve Frederick plan alternative plan with Middletown you." removed, a large parcel from the neighbors and other stakeholders, Ultimately, O-N Minerals 'rezoning, 533 acres on the north end county planning staff, County refused to reduce its rezoning of the Cedar Creek battlefield. It Administrator John R. Riley and the request by a single acre. Truck Traffic0 : 20009 40009 130,0 A Day? When the Middletown mining rezoning first came to public attention in April, 2006, O-N Mineral's own traffic impact analysis projected that industrial truck traffic on the area's narrow rural roads would soar to 1,305 dump trucks a day streaming through the heart of Middletown. That equals one dump truck per minute, 24 hours per day. Only after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected the mining rezoning in June, 2006, did O-N Minerals repudiate the traffic statement included in the original rezoning application. The company stopped talk- ing about expanding its operations and insisted new quarries would open, but truck traffic would barely grow. The proffer statement filed March 18, 2008 agrees to restrict truck traffic "to a maximum of 200 truck loads per day averaged over the prior 30 days through the scale house." But the trucks logged through the scale house are full, so this measure only counts the outbound truck trips. Therefore, if 200 trucks pass through the scale house each day, a total of 400 trucks actually will rumble in and out of Middletown. That is a huge increase over the number of trucks the company currently reports, from 50 to 70 through the scale house, or 100 to 140 a day. �. .., ..+�.....1. -. ... s,. -_: :.. - _.. _ .c..:.:. ;:. ��._. ___� _.-_..,......_�. ..-._._..-Fr..:-.,--_��_...-..._u.::. _._.�. ...., -.. ...--.:.�.�--L�—•..•.-�:- �^aY/.+�i.��lrn�aY ...... ._� � � .. __ _ .��_..�.. _._..-c_.e.x._... �.. s.�..s�.....� _. c. s POSTAL CUSTOMER April 2oo8 GET INVOLVED The Frederick Sentinel Is this the Future of Southern Frederick County- .9 MAKE YOUR..VOICE. HEARD Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 rshickle@shentel.net (h)540-667-2264 Back Creek: Gary Lefton 540-869-1972 gary@garylofton.org Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove 540-662-2734 garydove4 @ comcast. net Opequon: Bill M. Ewing 540-869-5058 supervisorewing@yahoo.com Shawnee: Gene E. Fisher (h)540-662-5238 gfisher@visuallink.com (w)540-665-4938 Stonewall: Charles DeHaven 540-662-7421 cdehaven@crosslink.net Red Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-722-3673 plemieux@visuallink.com Planning Commissioners Speak Out "Fundamentally, as a land -use issue, the time for the expansion of this quarry and the industrial use of these particular properties is frankly passed. " — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Christopher Mohn, June 7, 2006 "I know of absolutely nothing - I can conceive of nothing - that can be proffered that would make this an'acceptable rezoning for me. - Frederick County Planning Commissioner Robert Morris, June 7, 2006 "Then you have that many questions,, and that many concerns, it would seem to belie that there is something not quite right about this. This is a square peg trying to be jammed into a round hole." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Rick C. Ours, June 7, 2006 r----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK I i ❑ Enclosed is my $50 tax-deductible* gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick County. i ❑ Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the Frederick County Sentinel. ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. I i E-mail address: i i Name: i � I Street Address/PO Box: i i City/State/Zip: ' i Telephone Number: (Home/Work) (Cell) Please make check payable to: Preserve Frederick, P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 I � Contact us at: preservefrederick@yahoo.com * Preserve Frederick is recognized by the IRS as a non-profit charitable organization. Gifts are tax deductible as allowed by law. '---------J IN THE FREDERICK COUNTY Winchester, VA Permit No. 102 Tr I I PUBLISHED BY PRESERVE FREDERICK April 2oo8 � FREE WE INFORM YOU DECIDE Massive Mining Corridor Proposed Around Middletown Nearly two years after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected an application to greatly expand limestone mining near Middletown, the county Board of Supervisors will consider the request at a public hearing April 23. O-N Minerals Company is seek- ing to rezone 639 acres from rural agriculture to industrial mining on two parcels adjacent to its existing mining operations. The rezoning would double existing mine opera- tions and create a 1,261-acre indus- trial mining corridor more than 2.6 .miles long and about two-thirds of a mile 'wide adjacent to the Cedar Creek, and Belle Grove National Historical Park and historic Middletown. The enormous size of the rezon- ing is little changed since it was filed in June, 2005. ON Minerals executives last year rejected an alternative plan from Preserve Frederick to reduce the scale of the project, better balance mining expansion with community con- cerns and lessen the impacts on the southern Frederick community. Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAI D Conflicts with oca Plans & Land Uses O-N Minerals seeks to rezone 639 acres to create an industrial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and two-thirds mile wide next to historic Middletown and the National Historical Park. The tremendous expansion of limestone mining conflicts with the al. In the past 15 years, new subdivi - bridge over Cedar Creek to divert on March 18, 2008. O-N Minerals The Board of Supervisors will Frederick County and Middletown sions, notably Westernview and mining trucks from Middletown and continues to demand a mammoth consider the mining rezoning on Comprehensive Plans and other Chimney Hills, were created near an archeological survey of core bat- expansion with little more than April 23 at 7 pm at the County local economic development efforts. the parcels up for rezoning. But res- tlefield areas and the Nieswander Fort berms to buffer the surrounding Government Center, 107 North Kent Impacts would include ari increase idents in these enclaves and site on the property. community from the impacts. Street, Winchester. in industrial truck traffic, air pollu- Middletown said they were given no Deputy Planning Director tion, water pollution and changes to indication the county would permit Michael T. Ruddy wrote Thomas M. the water table, noise and dust from expanded mining near their homes. Lawson, O-N Minerals local attor- • • limestone mining, and visual pollu- Frederick County planners offered ney, a letter on September 8, 2006, to 1 n l nRequest tion from expanded mine waste many recommendations to improve suggest that "limiting the potential piles. the rezoning request. A January 3, acreage of development ... would The properties surrounding the 2006 letter from planner Candice E. limit the potential impacts" of • current mining operation are zoned Perkins sought to reduce the impact expanded mining. Tied to Water Plan' rural areas or residential/agricultur- on historic resources by calling for a O-N Land at Cedar Creek 0 -� Proposed Mining L. .. Corridor N Proposed Rezoning Current Mining Operation National Park Proposed Industrial Mining Corridor eN_ SHENANDOAH: Data source: Frederick County, VDCR. Although a%ois have. been made to Venty data, ac racy is not guaranteed Alternative Plan pertsor The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is paying for the O-N Rejected 7 Minerals rezoning application for expanded mining near Middletown. The agency agreed to do so when it signed an agreement in 2000 to acquire the com- pany's quarry pits for water storage after mining operations cease. This agree - The Frederick County Planning ment between the FCSA and O-N Minerals raises a host of troubling questions. Commission voted 8 to 4 to reject Why does the FCSA need three new quarry pits from the rezoning, when it the mining rezoning request in June, could simply use the existing quarry pit at Strasburg to store water? At a com- 2006. After waiting for action for munity meeting in Middletown April 2, O-N Minerals General Manager more than a year, Preserve Frederick Spencer C. Stinson said the Strasburg quarry holds "a billion gallons of water." sent O-N Minerals an alternative Must Southern Frederick residents accept a vast new mining corridor to mining plan. complete a water plan created by a private agency, with no public comment The alternative plan provided for or support? The FCSA water plan, the lease agreement with O-N Minerals expanded mining on a smaller scale and the rezoning for expanded mining were not debated in 2000. Area res- in an area already greatly affected by idents were not given a chance to discuss the wisdom of expanded mining the existing mine operations. Other near a national park and historic town in return for public water storage, a measures would have protected nat- need that could be better met by other options. ural and historic resources, diverted Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such truck traffic and addressed noise, air reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? Other and water impacts much more thor- communities are rejecting limestone quarries as reservoirs in karst geolog- oughly than the steps O-N Minerals ical areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to outlined in its proffers to the county. easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has experienced In a personal letter sent to the com- some water quality problems in limestone quarries used as reservoirs at pany in September, 2007, Board of Stephen's City and Clearbrook. Ch R' h Su ' d C v3 airman tc ar Shickle asked the company "to review and seriously consider the plan `Preserve Frederick' has sent to you." While the company acknowl- edged receipt of the Preserve Frederick alternative plan, all key elements were left out of the final proffer. statement sent to the county April 2oo8 OPINION The Frederick Sentinel The Frederick Sentinel IMPACTS April 2oo8 EDITORIALS Time to. ]Deny Mine Expansion The O-N Minerals request to double the size of its limestone mining operation at Middletown will have dragged on for nearly three years by the time it arrives before the Frederick, County Board of Supervisors on April 23. During that time, the company has never given an inch on the enormous scale of the project. Last summer, Preserve Frederick offered the company an alternative plan. It called for rezoning 158 acres to the south of the existing quar- ry, where impacts from current operations already intrude on the land- scape. Our plan would have kept mining going for another 30 plus years, while protecting valued historic and natural resources and easing the traffic, noise, dust and water impacts on the local community. We received some criticism for offering an alternative plan for min- ing. But we recognized that O-N Minerals has options. that could be exercised with fewer impacts on the Middletown community. In return, the company has never offered to scale back, even slightly, the over- sized plans it announced in 2005. O-N Minerals unwillingness to adjust its property interests to address the community's concerns is a compelling reason to end the long drama over mining in Middletown. We ask to supervisors to vote no on April 23. Vote No onl.,,Mining, Not Yes on Water S THE FREDERICK COUNTY -1 1 INf 1E Established 2006 An independent newspaper published by Preserve Frederick Nil Alfia Preserve Frederick www.PreserveFrederick.org preservefrederick@yahoo.com P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Preserve Frederick promotes compatible development that strengthens our communities, protects our historic and natural resources and preserve& the rural character of Frederick County. Company Can't Keep Facts Straight There they go again. O-N Minerals can't resist Snaking big claims that, on close examination, just aren't true. Among the whoppers we've been collecting since 2006, consider: "We aren't expanding the mine operation." "This, land is not part of the core area of the' Cedar Creek, battlefield." "The county promised to rezone our land back in 1.980il Mining Operations to Double "There has been a false impres- sion that this rezoning will somehow `expand' the Middletown quarry. But we will continue to operate at the same pace, with the same people, the same number of trucks," O-N Minerals' Joe Ferrell told the Winchester Star back in October, 2006. Maybe we got that "false impres- sion" from the fact that the words "expand" and "expansion" are used in the mining rezoning application no less than six times. Or from the company's own website, which states that its local operations have "a commitment to expand produc- tion to' meet growing market demands." O-N Minerals currently mines limestone in one quarry pit on about 622 acres it leases from Genstar Corp. With the rezoning, O-N plans to create three new quarry pits on land it owns outright; one to the south of existing operations and two to the north, on either side of Chapel Road. The company goes on to claim that only 12 percent of the land it owns will be quarried. What it does- n't say is that behind the proposed berms and buffers, 639 acres now zoned for farms, forest and limited homesites will be subject to all the industrial activities associated with mining; earthmoving, blasting and storing piles of "overburden," the soil and rock leftover once limestone is extracted. O-N is asking to double the size of limestone mining operations at Middletown, to a total of 1,261 acres on a corridor 2.6 miles long. Sure sounds like an expansion to us. Property Within Battlefield Core Area O-N Minerals officials deny that the land they want to rezone was ever an important part of the Battle of Cedar Creek. They insist that "lit- tle fighting occurred on this land, aside from troop movements" on the 533 acre parcel divided by Chapel Road. Not so. While the land may not lie within the National Historical Park bound- ary, the property is shown clearly within the core area of the battle- field, established in 1992 by the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. This three-year study of the Valley's battlefields, mandated by Congress, was based on historical records, surveys, maps and other resources. Indeed, the study refers specifi- cally to the importance of the land threatened by expanded mining: "If t. i II: continued north another half mile, this quarrying will eradicate the ruins of 18th-century Nieswander's Fort, site of Merritt's bivouac and George A. Custer's decisive flanking attack against John B. Gordon." Frederick County officials tried to correct the company. A January 3, 200E letter from the Department of Planning and Development to the late Chuck . Maddox, consultant to O-N Minerals, noted that the ° map "shows a portion of the property as being located within the core battle- field." No Promise Given for Rezoning O-N Minerals executives insist they have a decades -old commit- ment from Frederick County to rezone the property from agricultur- al to extractive manufacturing land uses. They point to a letter dated April 7, 1980 and signed by John R. Riley, then Frederick County Director of Planning and now the County Administrator. At the time, the county was updating its Comprehensive Plan and the property was owned by U.S. Steel Corporation. Riley wrote that "Frederick County will not consider the 542 acres ... during the compre- hensive rezoning proposal for Frederick County." He continued, "The Planning Commission recognizes the intent of U.S. Steel Corporation'to eventually mine this property," but "would only ,consider a rezoning from an agricul- tural zone to an EM zone on an indi- vidual petition basis." U.S. Steel never filed a mining rezoning in the 1980s. The land has remained zoned for agriculture ever since. Historic Resources on O-N Land at Cedar Creek National Park Proposed Rezoning N Current Mining Operation ' - Proposed Mining 16 , . Corridor Battle of Cedar Creek Confederate Troop Movements and Positions / Federal Troop. =" Movements and Positions Federal Camps 0 0.25 0.5 i Mlles m A A Data source: Frederick County, VDCR. Although efforts have been made to verify data, accuracy is not guaranteed Company Proffers Fall Far Short O-N Minerals application to tions will be given to historic rezone 639 acres in two parcels resources and that the company hasn't changed much in nearly specifically name the recipient of three years. Not only has the com- an eight acre historic reserve to be pany failed to reduce the size of the donated to a preservation group. rezoning by a single acre, its final The company has only agreed to proffer statement, a legally binding protect two cemeteries, not the list of restrictions, fails to provide archeological remains of the detail on protection and Nieswander Fort or any other enforcement that county staff have structures or battlefield resources. requested again and again. It did not name the recipient of the The clearest picture of how little reserve. has changed is evident in the September 8, 2006 letter from Truck Traffic county Deputy Planning Director Michael T. Ruddy to O-N Minerals Mr. Ruddy requested the com- attorney, Thomas M. Lawson, pany address the potential impacts commenting on a proffer statement associated with an increase 'of min - dated August 23, 2006. Most of the ing trucks on streets in county `s concerns remain unad- Middletown. There is no evidence dressed in the final proffer state- in the latest proffer statement that ment submitted March 18, 2008. the impacts were studied. Size of project G rou ndWater/ Dust Control/Biasting Controls Mr. Ruddy suggested that "lim- iting the potential acreage of devel- Mr. Ruddy wrote that "An opment ... would limit the poten- alternative approach for the appli- tial impacts" of expanded mining cation and proffer statement may on the community. The company be to seek to better understand the never reduced the scale of the potential impacts associated with rezoning. the proposed mining operations and seek to avoid them by refining Enforcement the potential scope of mining operation." There has been no Mr. Ruddy expressed concern change in the size and scope of the that the county could end up rezoning. responsible for enforcing problems with neighbors' wells and struc- Proffers That Aren't tures caused by expanded mining. Really Proffers The company offered to hire inde- pendent firms to conduct surveys Mr. Ruddy noted that the com- of wells and structures prior to new pany was offering to give up, by mining and after problems are Proffer, things already required by reported. But those firms would be county rules, other agencies or paid by O-N Minerals to assess the existing contracts. These include: company's own damage and liabil- creating distance buffers to block ity, a sure source of conflict with views of the mining operation, con - neighboring landowners. Such trolling dust on the site, adhering to conflicts inevitably end up before state limits on mining noise and county officials. lighting, maintaining a state air permit and granting water rights to 11storic resources the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The company did not Mr. Ruddy recommended that remove these items from its final the company address what protec- proffer statement. Radical Plan Would Phase Expansion In the final proffer statement, O-N Minerals offered an untested plan to phase the opening of new limestone quarries over 30 years. It calls for mining to begin immediately after the rezonira -n the parcel south of the existing mining operation, to start 10 years after the rezoning on the par- cel north of the existing mine and south of Chapel Road and to start 20 years after the rezoning on the parcel north of Chapel Road. Company officials admitted the concept was "revolutionary" when asked about it at a community meeting in Middletown April 2. In fact, it is unheard of in the Commonwealth of Virginia. O-N Minerals' own attor- ney admitted that not one other county in the state had ever agreed to an industrial land use rezoning with a timetable for phasing the develop- ment. Local governments traditionally do not want to tie the hands of future decision -makers. When a county designates an area for industrial or com- mercial land uses in its comprehensive plan, land use map and zoning ordinances, it encourages these land uses in the present or near future. Longer term goals are adapted as community needs change. In Virginia, phased development has only been applied to large resi- dential and commercial rezoning applications. By setting a timetable for when new houses, offices and shops will be built, both the developers and county officials can coordinate the roads, schools, water, sewer and other services the project will need., Preserve Frederick Crafted Option for Rezoning In August 2007, Preserve Frederick sent O-N Minerals a rea- sonable alternative to the company's Mining Rezoning Alternative Plan massive expansion of limestone mining at Middletown. The alterna- tive would have greatly reduced the / impacts of mining on the rural and P g M ii- historic landscape and quality of life r r e /�% in Southern Frederick County. p ra. i n i Preserve se rHutchinson hiredederick landri ,rr);'�, Tanner John 1 principal P , P P in the Jennings Gap Partnership in Staunton, to help develop the alter- native. He studied the rezoning / request, the limestone seam in the area, the natural and' historic resources on the property up for 3 rezoning, and recommendations F it,P from Frederick County � ,planning � 4g Buffer staff on ways to reduce the impacts•; th of the rezoning. . The Preserve Frederick plan would have provided for expanded a � miningon the site for at least 30 o soo t ,000 m ,� I I t i I Feet years, while preserving nearly all of the historic battlefield resources, protecting the natural resources on called for rezoning thel58-acre par- chairman of the county Board of Cedar Creek and providing a signif- cel on the southern end, which is Supervisors, Richard C. Shickle. icant buffer against noise, dust and adjacent to the, existing mining oper- The chairman subsequently wrote traffic impacts for the neighbors. ation and already visually impacted to O-N Minerals, asking it to A critical element was to shrink by it. "review and seriously consider the the proposed expansion.: Specif- Preserve Frederick shared its plan `Preserve Frederick' sent to ically, the Preserve Frederick plan alternative plan with Middletown you." removed a large parcel from the neighbors and other stakeholders, Ultimately, O-N Minerals rezoning, 533 acres on the north end county planning staff, County refused to reduce its rezoning of the Cedar Creek battlefield. It Administrator John R. Riley and the request by a single acre. Truck Traffic: 200? 40009 1300 A Day? When the Middletown mining rezoning first came to public attention in April, 2006, O-N Mineral's own traffic impact analysis projected that industrial truck traffic on the area's narrow rural roads would soar to 1,305 dump trucks a day streaming through the heart of Middletown. That equals one dump truck per minute, 24 hours per day. Only after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected the mining rezoning in June, 2006, did O-N Minerals repudiate the traffic statement included in the original rezoning application. The company stopped talk- ing about expanding its operations and insisted new quarries would open, but truck traffic would barely grow. The proffer statement filed March 18, 2008 agrees to restrict truck traffic "to a maximum of 200 truck loads per day averaged over the prior 30 days through the scale house." But the trucks logged through the scale house are full, so this measure only counts the outbound truck trips. Therefore, if 200 trucks pass through the scale house each day, a total of 400 trucks actually will rumble in and out of Middletown. That is a huge increase over the number of trucks the company currently reports, from 50 to 70 through the scale house, or 100 to 140 a day. rs. April.oae GET INVOLVED� .e...c.n„�_ Is this the Future of Southern Frederick County? .s F. 4 , Contact Your County Supervisor Chairman: Richard C. Shickle (w)540-545-7312 rshickle@shentel.net (h)540-667-2264 Back Creek: Gary Lofton 540-869-1972 gary@garylofton.org Gainesboro: Gary W. Dove Opequon; Bill M. Ewing Shawnee: Gene E. Fisher Stonewall: Charles DeHaven Red Bud: Philip Lemieux 540-662-2734 garydove4@comcast.net 540-869-5058 supervisorewing@yahoo.com (h)540-662-5238 gfisher@visuallink.com (w)540=665-4938 540-662-7421 cdehaven@crosslink.net 540-722-3673 plemieux@visuallink.com Planning Commissioners Speak Out "Fundamentally, as a land -use issue, the time for the expansion of this ' quarry and the industrial use of these, particular properties is frankly passed. " — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Christopher Mohn, June 7, 2006 "I know of absolutely nothing I can conceive of nothing - that can be proffered that would make this an acceptable rezoning for me." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Robert Morris, June 7, 2006 "When you have that many questions, and that many concerns, it would seen' to belie that there is something not quite right about this. This is a square peg trying to be jammed into a round hole." — Frederick County Planning Commissioner Rick C. Ours, June 7, 2006 r----------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES! I WANT TO PRESERVE FREDERICK ❑ Enclosed is my $50 tax-deductible* gift to join Preserve Frederick and support compatible development for Frederick County. ❑ Enclosed is an additional contribution to support future issues of the Frederick County Sentinel. ❑ Please notify me of urgent local issues that affect my community. E-mail address: i i i i i Name: , Street Address/PO Box: r , i City/State/Zip: , i i , i Telephone Number: (Home/Work) (Cell) i , �. Please make check payable to: Preserve Frederick, P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Contact us at: preservefrederick@yahoo.com i , * Preserve Frederick is recognized by the IRS as a non-profit charitable organization. Gifts are tax deductible as allowed by law. i L-----------------------------------------------------------------------------J POSTAL CUSTOMER THE FREDERICK COUNTY Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAID \ Winchester, VA Permit No. 102 ECRWSS ]E\ PUBLISHED BY PRESERVE FREDERICK April Zoo$ FREE WE INFORM YOU DECIDE Massive M ining Corridor I roposed Around Middletown Nearly two years after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected an application to greatly expand limestone mining near -Middletown, the county Board of Supervisors will consider the request at a public hearing April 23. O-N Minerals Company is seek- ing to rezone 639 acres from rural agriculture to industrial mining on two parcels adjacent to its existing mining operations. The rezoning would double existing mine opera- tions and create a 1,261-acre indus- trial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and about two-thirds of a Mile wide adjacent to the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park and historic Middletown. The enormous size of the rezon- ing is little changed since it was filed in June, 2005. O-N Minerals executives last year rejected an alternative plan from Preserve Frederick to reduce the scale of the project, better balance mining expansion with community con- cerns and lessen the impacts on the southern Frederick community. Conflicts with Local Plans & Land Uses O-N Minerals seeks to rezone 639 acres to create an industrial mining corridor more than 2.6 miles long and two-thirds mile wide next to historic. Middletown and the National Historical Park. The tremendous expansion of limestone mining conflicts with the al. In the past 15 years, new subdivi- bridge over Cedar Creek to divert on March 18, 2008. O-N Minerals The Board of Supervisors will Frederick County and Middletown sions, notably Westernview and mining trucks from Middletown and continues to demand a mammoth consider. the mining rezoning on Comprehensive Plans and other Chimney Hills; were created near an archeological survey of core bat- expansion with little more than April 23 at 7 pm at the County local economic development efforts. the parcels up for rezoning. But res- tlefield areas and the Nieswander Fort berms to buffer the surrounding Government Center, 107 North Kent Impacts would include an increase idents in these enclaves and site on the property. community from the impacts. Street, Winchester. in industrial truck traffic, air pollu- Middletown said they were given no Deputy Planning Director tion, water pollution and changes to indication the county would permit Michael T. Ruddy wrote Thomas M. the water table, noise and dust from expanded mining near their homes. Lawson, O-N Minerals local .attor- • • limestone mining, and visual pollu- Frederick County planners offered ney, a letter on September 8, 2006, to tion from expanded mine waste many recommendations to improve suggest that "limiting the potential Mining Request piles. the rezoning request. A January 3, acreage of development ... would The properties surrounding the 2006 letter from planner Candice E. limit the potential impacts" of' • current mining operation are zoned Perkins sought to reduce the impact expanded mining. Tied to WaterPlan rural areas or residential/agricultur- on historic resources by calling for a t O-N Land at Cedar Creek N '� Proposed Mining L. Corridor N Proposed Rezoning Current Mining Operation National Park 0 0.5 Proposed Industrial Mining Corridor SHENANDOAH Data source: Fmden;k County, VDCR. Although efforts have been made to verify data, accuracy is not guaranteed Alternative Plan The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is paying for the O-N Rejected 7 Minerals rezoning application for expanded mining near Middletown. The agency agreed to do so when it signed —an agreement in 2000 to acquire the com- pany's quarry pits for water storage after mining operations cease. This agree - The Frederick County Planning ment between the FCSA and O-N Minerals raises a host of troubling questions. Commission voted 8 to 4 to reject Why does the FCSA need three new quarry pits from the rezoning, when it the mining rezoning request in June, could simply use the existing quarry pit at Strasburg to store water? At a com- 2006. After waiting for action for munity meeting in Middletown April 2, O-N Minerals General Manager more than a year, Preserve Frederick Spencer C. Stinson said the Strasburg quarry holds "a billion gallons of water." sent O-N Minerals an alternative , Must Southern Frederick residents accept a vast new mining corridor to mining plan. complete a water plan created by a private agency, with no public comment The alternative plan provided for or support? The FCSA water plan, the lease agreement with O-N Minerals expanded mining on a smaller scale and the rezoning for expanded mining were not debated in 2000. Area res- in an area already greatly affected by idents were not given a chance to discuss the wisdom of expanded mining the existing mine operations. Other near a national park and historic town in return for public water storage, a measures would have protected nat- need that could be better met by other options. ural and historic resources, diverted Has any independent agency studied the dangers and benefits of such truck traffic and addressed noise, air reservoirs or were they chosen simply because they already exist? Other and water impacts much more thor- communities are rejecting limestone quarries as reservoirs in karst geolog- oughly than the steps O-N Minerals ical areas due to the porous nature of the rock, which permits pollutants to outlined in its proffers to the county. easily enter the water supply. Frederick County already has experienced In a personal letter sent to the com- some water quality problems in limestone quarries used as reservoirs at pany in September, 2007, Board of Stephen's City .and Clearbrook. Su ervisorc Chairman R' h d C p tc ar Shickle asked the company "to review and seriously consider the plan `Preserve Frederick' has sent to you." While the company acknowl- edged receipt of the Preserve Frederick alternative plan, all key elements were left out of the final proffer statement sent to the county April 2oo8 OPINION The Frederick Sentinel The Frederick Sentinel IMPACTS April 2oo8 EDITORIALS Time to Deny Mine Expansion The O-N Minerals request to double the size of its limestone mining operation at Middletown will have dragged on for nearly three years by the time it arrives before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on April 23. During that time, the company has never given an inch on the enormous scale of the project. Last summer, Preserve Frederick offered the company an alternative plan. It called for rezoning 158 acres to the south of the existing quar- ry, where impacts from current operations already intrude on the land- scape. Our plan would have kept mining going for another 30 plus years, while protecting valued historic and natural resources and easing the traffic, noise, dust and water impacts on the local community. We received some criticism for offering an alternative plan for min- ing. But we recognized that O-N Minerals has options that could be exercised with fewer impacts on the Middletown community. In return, the company has never offered to scale back, even slightly, the over- sized plans it announced in 2005. O-N Minerals unwillingness to adjust its property interests to address the community's concerns is a compelling reason to end the long drama over mining in Middletown. We ask to supervisors. to vote no on April 23. Vote No on Mining, Not Yes on Water / THE FREDERICK COUNTY Established 2006 An independent newspaper published by Preserve Frederick Preserve Frederick www.PreserveFrederick.org preservefrederick@yahoo.com P.O. Box 562, Middletown, VA 22645 Preserve Frederick promotes compatible development that strengthens our communities, protects our historic and natural resources and preserves the rural character of Frederick County. Company Can't Keep Facts Straight There they go again. O-N Minerals can't resist making big claims that, on close examination, just aren't true. Among the whoppers we've been collecting since 2006, consider: "We aren't expanding the mine operation." "This land is not part of the core area of the Cedar Creek battlefield." "The county promised to rezone our land back in 1980." Mining Operations to Double "There has been a false impres- sion that this rezoning will somehow `expand' the Middletown quarry. But we will continue to operate at the. same pace, with the same people, the same number of trucks," O-N Minerals' Joe Ferrell told the Winchester Star back in October, 2006. Maybe we got that "false impres- sion" from the fact that the words "expand" and "expansion" are used in the mining rezoning application no less than six times. Or from the company's own website, which states that its local operations have "a commitment to expand produc- tion to meet growing market demands." O-N Minerals currently mines limestone in one quarry pit on about 622 acres it leases from Genstar Corp. With the rezoning, O-N plans to create three new quarry pits on land it owns outright; one to the south of existing operations and two to the north, on,either side of Chapel, Road. The company goes on to claim that only 12 percent of the land it owns will be quarried. What it does- n't say is that behind the proposed berms and buffers, 639 acres now zoned for farms, forest and limited homesites will be subject to all the industrial activities associated with mining; earthmoving, blasting and storing piles of "overburden," the soil and rock leftover once limestone is extracted. O-N is asking to double the size of limestone mining operations at Middletown, to a total of 1,261 acres on a corridor 2.6 mules long. Sure sounds like an expansion to us. Property Within Battlefield Core Area O-N Minerals officials deny that the land they want to rezone was ever an important part of the Battle of Cedar Creek. They insist that "lit- tle fighting occurred on this land, aside from troop movements" on the 533 acre parcel divided by Chapel Road. Not so. While the land may not lie within the National Historical Park -bound- ary, the property is shown clearly within the core area of the battle- field, established in 1992 by the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. This three-year study of the Valley's battlefields, mandated by Congress, was based on historical records, surveys, maps and other resources. Indeed, the study refers specifi- cally to the importance of the land threatened by expanded mining: "If i . ,. continued north another half mile, this quarrying will eradicate the ruins of 18th-century Nieswander's Fort, site of Merritt's bivouac and George A. Custer's decisive flanking attack against John B. Gordon." Frederick County officials tried to correct the company. A January 3, 2006 letter from the Department of Planning and Development to the late, ,Chuck Maddox,_ consultant to O-N Minerals, noted that the map "shows a portion of the property as being located within the core battle- field." No P, romise Given for Rezoning O-N Minerals executives insist they have a decades -old commit- ment from Frederick County to rezone the property from agricultur- al to extractive manufacturing land uses. They point to a letter dated April 7, 1980 and signed by John R. Riley, then Frederick County Director of Planning and now the County Administrator. At the time, the county was updating its Comprehensive Plan and the property was owned by U.S. Steel Corporation. Riley wrote that "Frederick County will not consider the 542 acres ... during the compre- hensive rezoning proposal for Frederick County." He continued, "The Planning Commission recognizes the intent of U.S. Steel Corporation to eventually mine this property," but "would only consider a 'rezoning from an agricul- tural zone to an EM zone on an indi- vidual petition basis." U.S. Steel never filed a mining rezoning in the 1980s. The land has remained zoned for agriculture ever since. Historic Resources on O-N Land at Cedar Creek ...... National Park Proposed Rezoning ' N m r Current Mining Operation' ®"r Proposed Mining Corridor Battle of Cedar Creek w` Confederate Troop Movements and Positions °* Federal Troop c d u Movements and Positionsx*; A Federal Camps 0 0.25 0.5 I I I Miles ............................. s 4 i Q Data source: Frederick County, VDCR, Although eXorta have been made to verily data, accuracy Is not guaranteed Company Proffers Fall Far Short O-N Minerals application to tions will be given to historic rezone 639 acres in two parcels resources and that the company hasn't changed much in nearly specifically name the recipient of three years. Not only has the com- an eight acre historic reserve to be pany failed to reduce the size of the donated to a preservation group. rezoning by a single acre, its final The company has only agreed to proffer statement, a legally binding protect two cemeteries, not the list of restrictions, fails to provide archeological remains of the detail on protection and Nieswander Fort , or any other enforcement that county staff have structures or battlefield resources. requested again and again. It did not name the recipient of the The clearest picture of how little reserve. has changed is evident in the September 8, 2006 letter from Truck Traffic county Deputy Planning Director Michael T. Ruddy to O-N Minerals Mr. Ruddy requested the com- attorney, Thomas M. Lawson, pany address the potential impacts commenting on a proffer statement associated with an increase of min - dated August 23, 2006. Most of the ing trucks on streets in county `s concerns remain unad- Middletown. There is no evidence dressed in the final proffer state- in the latest proffer statement that ment submitted March 18, 2008. the impacts were studied. Size of project GroundWater/Dust Control/Blasting Controls Mr. Ruddy suggested that "lim- iting the potential acreage of devel- Mr. Ruddy wrote that "An opment ... would limit the poten- alternative approach for the appli- tial impacts" of expanded mining cation and proffer statement may on the community. The company be to seek to better understand the never reduced the scale of the potential impacts associated with rezoning. the proposed mining operations and seek to avoid them by refining Enforcement the potential scope of mining operation." There has been no Mr. Ruddy expressed concern change in the size and scope of the that the county could end up rezoning. responsible for enforcing problems with neighbors' wells and strut- Profferc. That Aren't tures caused by expanded mining. Really Proffers The company offered to hire inde- pendent firms to conduct surveys Mr. Ruddy noted that the tom - of wells and structures prior to new pany was offering to give up, by mining and after problems are proffer, things already required by reported. But those firms would be county rules, other agencies or paid by O-N Minerals to assess the existing contracts. These include: company's own damage and liabil- creating distance buffers to block ity, a sure source of conflict with views of the mining operation, con - neighboring landowners. Such trolling dust on the site, adhering to conflicts inevitably end up before state limits on mining noise and county officials. lighting, maintaining a state air permit and granting water rights to Historic resources the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The company did not Mr. Ruddy recommended that remove these items from its final the company address what protec- proffer statement. Radical Plan Would Phase Expansion r In the final proffer statement, O-N Minerals offered an untested plan to phase the opening of new limestone quarries over 30 years. It calls for mining to begin immediately after the rezoning on the parcel south of the existing mining operation, to start 10 years after the rezoning on the par- cel north of the existing mine and south of Chapel Road and to start 20 years after the rezoning on the parcel north of Chapel Road. Company officials admitted the concept was "revolutionary" when asked about it at a community meeting in Middletown April 2. In fact, it is unheard of in the Commonwealth of Virginia. O-N Minerals' own attor- ney admitted that not one other county in the state had ever agreed to an industrial land use rezoning with a timetable for phasing the develop- ment. Local governments traditionally do not want to tie the hands of future decision -makers. When a county designates an area for industrial or com- mercial land uses in its comprehensive plan, land use map and zoning ordinances, it encourages these land uses in the present or near future. Longer term goals are adapted as community needs change. In Virginia, phased development has only been applied to large resi- dential and commercial rezoning applications. By setting a timetable for when new houses, offices and shops will be built, both the developers and county officials can coordinate the roads, schools, water, sewer and other services the project will need. Preserve Frederick Crafted Option for Rezoning In August 2007, Preserve Frederick sent O-N Minerals a rea- sonable alternative to the company's Mining Rezoning Alternative Plan massive expansion of limestone mining at, Middletown. The alterna- tive would have greatly reduced the impacts of mining on the rural and historic- landscape and quality of life d urr/r��lyl�� in,, Southern Frederick County. aY # " p ra i n Preserve Frederick hired land use planner John Hutchinson, principal in the Jennings -Gap Partnership in 04,y Staunton, to help develop the alter- CO" native. He studied the rezoning request, the limestone seam in the ' area, the natural and historic resources on the property up for rezoning, and recommendations.,,,;,, from Frederick County planning Buffer staff on ways to reduce the impacts of the rezoning. The Preserve Frederick plan a%` would have provided for expanded mining on the site for at least 30 0 500 1,000 Feet years, while preserving nearly all of the historic battlefield resources, protecting the natural resources on called for rezoning thel58-acre par- chairman of the county Board of Cedar Creek and providing a signif- cel on the southern end, which is Supervisors, Richard C. Shickle. icant buffer against noise, dust and adjacent to the existing mining oper- The chairman subsequently wrote traffic impacts for the neighbors. ation and already visually impacted,' to O-N Minerals, asking it to A critical element was to shrink by it. "review and seriously consider the :the . proposed expansion. Specif- Preserve Frederick shared its plan `Preserve Frederick' sent to -ically, the Preserve Frederick plan alternative plan with Middletown you." removed a large parcel from the neighbors and other stakeholders, Ultimately, O-N Minerals rezoning, 533 acres on the north end county planning staff, County refused to reduce its rezoning of the. Cedar Creek battlefield. It Administrator John R. Riley and the request by a single acre. Truck Traffic: 200? 40009 1300 A Day? When the Middletown mining rezoning first came to public attention in April, 2006, O-N Mineral's own traffic impact analysis projected that industrial truck traffic on the area's narrow rural roads would soar to 1,305 dump trucks a day streaming through the heart of Middletown. That equals one dump truck per minute, 24 hours per day. Only after the Frederick County Planning Commission rejected the mining rezoning in June, 2006, did O-N Minerals repudiate the traffic statement included in the original rezoning application. The company stopped talk- ing about expanding its operations and insisted new quarries would open, but truck traffic would barely grow. The proffer statement filed March 18, 2008 agrees to restrict truck traffic "to a maximum of 200 truck loads per day averaged over the prior 30 days through the scale house." But the trucks logged through the scale house are full, so this measure only counts the outbound truck trips. Therefore, if 200 trucks pass through the scale house'each day, a total of 400 trucks actually will rumble in and out of Middletown. That is a huge increase over the number of trucks the company currently reports, from 50 to 70 through the scale house, or 100 to 140 a day. ...—.v,,,,...--_-,.._._..._y.M>�I�W�aAa..twl►s�[ss:ac.+ai+:Q .. - .. .: . _._.... — _.a ._._ — y%::af.._... .-rz_ —— ._<_. .