Note: The following is not a verbatim transcript of the Zoning Hearing Board meeting; it is simply one person’s summary of the major points made by those involved in the hearing process.  For that reason, quotation marks are not used unless a direct quote was recorded.  For information about obtaining an official ZHB transcript, contact the New Hanover Township office.

This meeting was a rather lively one. It began with further testimony from Mr. Uday Patankar, of Gibraltar Rock, Inc. Mr. Stephen Harris (attorney for Gibraltar Rock) began by asking questions about the DEP filing (for which the public hearing had been held the previous evening). Mr. Patankar noted that they are filing for several minor variances with the DEP. Most of these variances had to do with the proximity of the quarries surrounding berm to wetland and stream areas. A number of objections were raised by Mr. Sager, the lawyer for a local resident, as to the relevance of this testimony before a zoning hearing board trying to decide zoning issues.

Patankar went on to describe the DEP application approval process. He explained that Gibraltar Rock submitted the application and a comment letter is generated by the DEP after taking all input, including that of the public. Gibraltar Rock will then be required to make appropriate modifications and additions. It was interesting that there was no mention made of the fact that the application was administratively inadequate, as was established at the previous night's public hearing, yet if the process were continued as outlined, the public would not be allowed any further comment on the application after it was modified to comply with the requirements. This is unfair to the public just as if Gibraltar Rock had submitted a blank application (which would have clearly been administratively inadequate), received their public hearing, AND THEN completed the application without allowing further comment from the public. In this case however, State Senator Wonderling is on the record as demanding another hearing on the DEP application.

It should be noted that Patankar is listed on the DEP's Website for the  Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee as an adviser. This fact, combined with Silvi's history and the clearly evident conflict of interest for  Patankar, one rivaled in recent years only be the Arthur Anderson's dual relationship with the Enron corporation, would adequately explain the current title enjoyed by Patankar.

Patankar proceeded to discuss the issues related to the air and water emissions that the quarry will generate. He mentioned the fact that Gibraltar plans on submitting its air quality permit to the DEP around the 15th of July. A number of DEP regulations dealing with these emissions was submitted into evidence. Another apparent reason for the purchase of Patankar by Gibraltar Rock came to light when it was mentioned that, while each of the activities at the plant have certain emission standards that they must achieve (the quarrying activity, hot mix asphalt, ready mix cement), it is up to the discretion of the DEP to apply a facility wide emission cap to the entire activity. This discretion could be utilized to put tighter controls on the emissions than the national ambient air quality standards that are set by the US EPA would allow. Such a restriction might, hypothetically, be utilized in cases where, for example, some DEP officials were foolish enough (or paid enough) to allow these types of heavy industrial pollutants to be emitted in a residential neighborhood in close proximity to an elderly care facility, several schools, etc.

Patankar then moved to try to criticize, as an expert witness, the legality of several aspects of the township zoning ordinances by comparing them to various state regulations. This raised several objections from the lawyers for the township and its residence about the expertise of the witness as to the legality of the ordinance. While several former objections were overruled, this one was sustained.

Next began the rather lively cross examination of Patankar by Mr. Sager.  Sager questioned Patankar about the number of acres in the original plan (which included 163), the number of acres in the current plan (which includes 240) and what the DEP application covered. It was discovered that the DEP application covers the entire current 240 acres. Mr. Sager pushed the point that a 163 acre quarry would not be the same thing as a 240 acre quarry and Patankar explained that a permit for 240 acres would cover a 163 acre quarry.

Another issue was that the township ordinance was made more clear as a result of the first application. The first application requested relief because zoning did not SEEM to be permitted in any of the township zoning. While the township has always said the zoning allows for quarrying in the HI (heavy industrial) district, this fact was made more explicit in the ordinance between the first and the second applications. As a result it has been admitted by Patankar that the relief being sought in the second application is not the same as the relief being sought in the first. In the first they wanted relief from the mistaken impression that quarrying is not allowed in the township at all, while in the second they wanted relief from the fact that it is allowed in only the HI and not the LI also.

Mr. Sager went on to establish that local township zoning restrictions of mining do not conflict with the Non-Coal Mining Act that allows for mining. Patankar admitted that the Applicant does not think the Non-Coal Mining Act allows mining wherever anyone may feel like mining and that township zoning laws do apply. (though the fact that Gibraltar Rock purchased land with the assumption that it could be mined even though they knew this land was zoned where  the ordinances don't allow mining makes this answer questionable).

Patankar agreed, not only that the township has a right to regulate mining in its ordinances under the Non-Coal Mining Act, but that the reasons include (but, of course are not limited to) the health and safety of the public. At the same time and in complete contradiction to these points he conceded, Patankar tried to provide testimony on issues of the law related to whether or not the township ordinances violate the Non-Coal Mining Act.

The hearing was adjourned.

See Also:
Summary of the previous Gibraltar 2 meeting (April 21, 2003)