|
The following is an article from the Independent about the proposed Crown Truck Terminal project.
Water, trucks don't mix
By: KRISTIN SHAW
12/11/2007
 Email to a friend  Post a Comment  Printer-friendly
SCHODACK-The Planning Board brainstormed at a meeting Monday, trying to come up with ways to protect the aquifer and still allow Crown Enterprises to move forward with plans for a 105-bay truck terminal on Route 9.
The 35-acre parcel is on the east side of the road, about a mile north of I-90 Exit 12. Many residents are opposed to the project for several reasons including possible contamination of the aquifer, traffic, noise and air quality.
      Some residents insist the application should not even be considered because truck terminals are prohibited over the aquifer or in what's called a direct recharge area, where surface water moves into the aquifer.
December 3 was the last day the board would accept comments about the project's Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Planning Board Engineer Richard Laberge drafted comments on behalf of the board based on the public's input and said the next step is for board members to go through his report and identify issues he may not have included.
"The applicant would then have to address those issues in the final Environmental Impact Statement," he said, noting that process could take about a month.
He noted that the DEIS indicates a waiver from the prohibition against tractor-trailers under the Aquifer Protection Law, is requested.
"This requires the Planning Board to determine that the health and safety of the public will be protected," said Mr. Laberge. "The applicant should indicate any additional measures being taken to protect the health and safety of the public."
Board member Paul Puccio said he believes traffic issues can be dealt with, but he wants more information on how Crown plans to protect the Schodack Terrace Aquifer.
"People don't believe we can engineer this project to the point where it is safe," said Mr. Puccio, referring to numerous comments made at a recent public hearing on the issue. "They don't believe it will be adequate. We need to look at the highest areas for risk and address them in the most responsible way."
Mr. Puccio wonders if this project will not exacerbate problems as more truck stops and terminals are built along Route 9.
"Is there anything beyond basic engineering we can request that the applicant provide for an additional level of protection?" he asked. He suggested some sort of monitoring system that will detect a spill quickly and also wondered if there is any way to provide more surveillance at the site.
Mr. Puccio previously suggested that Crown be required to install monitoring wells, and while Mr. Laberge said that is one idea to be considered, he noted, "by the time [contaminants] hit the wells, we should have already known there was a problem."
Board member Jeff Haber said the Route 9 corridor, with its potential for development, and the aquifer are the two largest assets the town has, both in the same place.
"The corridor is the biggest potential source of lowering our taxes in this town," he said. "The idea that we can grow corn here for the rest of our lives is pretty naive. We have to find a way to strike a balance.
"This is the best use for this area at this time, but we need the best start-of-the-art protection for our aquifer," he added . "We need to give residents some reassurance we are doing our best to insist that things go into the construction of this building that will protect them and the town."
Mr. Haber asked whether the building can be built with floors that slope to the center. "That way everything could run into a drain and to a tank that could be pumped out on a regular basis," he said.
Board member Wayne Johnson asked if the town can have any control over what materials will be kept in the trucks and in the warehouse. "If not, we may be creating a problem we don't want to have in this town," he said.
Mr. Laberge said he would look into whether the town can maintain some sort of control over what is allowed on the site, and how that might be enforced.
As for the aquifer, Mr. Johnson said, "If we're not doing everything we can to protect the aquifer, we should not approve this project. I would like to see that the developers are taking a greater interest in protecting the aquifer than is minimally required."
Mr. Laberge noted that the protective membrane proposed for the project is under the storm water facility only, not the entire site. He said Crown needs to expand its discussion of contamination potential of vehicle fluid spills in the parking and yard areas, cargo spills in the yard area and building, fluid spills in the safety building, and the use of de-icing materials in the parking and yard areas.
"A discussion of the impact of the above types of contamination sources compared to the background potential should be presented," said Mr. Laberge. "Mitigation measures to be discussed should include spill prevention training and spill response training."
As for air quality, Mr. Johnson said the DEIS does not adequately address diesel trucks and their emissions.
"Rensselaer County is frequently on an air quality alert due to smog from vehicle emissions," he said. "The large number of trucks using this facility, as well as the tractors used to move trailers in the yard, should be addressed. Some measures need to be taken to assure that this project does not negatively impact the air quality in the neighborhood and in the region."
Mr. Laberge said an analysis of diesel emissions will be required and potential mitigation offered.
Mr. Johnson said the DEIS also does nothing to attempt to mitigate noise impacts on neighboring properties.
      "Meeting the town code limits of 90 decibels at the sources adjoining the boundary should not be the accepted level," he said.
According to the report, the noise level at the closest property line will reach 90 decibels from tractor and back-up alarms.
Mr. Johnson wondered if it is possible to reduce the decibel level on back-up alarms, then asked whether they could be eliminated altogether. He asked if berms or limiting the hours of operation would be keep noise levels down.
"It appears that the movements ... are anticipated to occur during the early morning hours," he said. "This might not be the best site for that to happen."
Mr. Laberge said the operations generating noise at night need to be identified and mitigation measures proposed.
Mr. Laberge also told the board the impact of the impact of the increase in real estate taxes should be quantified, for both the town and school district, taking into account any possible tax incentives.
To contact reporter Kristin Shaw email kshaw@IndeNews.com
|
