Wind: 0 mph
To The Editor:
For eight months now, many of us have been involved in the Act 250 process, trying to protect our neighborhood and Rochester from a large proposed rock quarry. All final arguments and rebuttals have been filed, and now we await the decision by the environmental commission.
All during this lengthy process, we have heard of how Kingsbury promises to be "a good neighbor." However, we have just received notification that Kingsbury plans to sidestep and avoid the local permit process, claiming that they have planning board permission for the project. We believe that the local process is important and, further, that trying to avoid it through stonewalling or legal technicality is not how a "good neighbor" behaves.
There is much trust involved in issuing a permit for something so powerful as a quarry. Will they conform to all conditions? Will they really limit the number of truck trips to 40 per day? Will they really keep the decibel level down to the limits they have promised? Will they faithfully mow and plow to maintain safe sight distance where the trucks will enter Route 100? The list of promises is huge! And so I ask the public and our town boards, is this the company that we want to trust? Or does this moving to avoid the local permit process show the "true colors" of Kingsbury?
Editor's Note: On February 7, 2007, the Rochester Planning Commission notified the applicants of the need for a conditional use permit for the project.