Public split on campground clay mining

by Larry Austin
Grand Island Dispatch, August 24, 2007

Christine Price explains a schematic drawing for a proposed pond off
Whitehaven Road at Monday’s Grand Island Town Board meeting.
(photo by Larry Austin)

Ponds, like beauty, are in the eye of the beholder, as Grand Island Town Supervisor Peter McMahon explained. Is a pond intended for aesthetic reasons or is it mining for clay?

“Nobody comes in and says they’re mining clay,” McMahon said recently. “They all come in and say they’re building a pond.”

Monday at Town Hall, the Grand Island Town Board held a public hearing regarding the Niagara Falls Campground pond proposed for Whitehaven Road. Developers need a mining overlay district granted by the town in order to dig the clay for a pond. Comments at the meeting were divided pro and con.

The state has a law that preempts local authority in mining matters, McMahon explained. Consequently, Grand Island has required a mining overlay district to “be able to have some say” in excavations. Before the mining overlay district concept was established, “the town had no say because if the state granted a mining permit, it was over,” McMahon said. “If the state gave them a permit to mine 24/7/365, they could do it.”

Christine Price, architect for the campground developers, said the pond itself would cover 7.5 acres with a small island and would go to a depth of 18-20 feet.

The pond is “an integral part of the campground,” she said, and would provide wildlife education, fishing, habitat and nature trails for patrons of the campground business.

Don Benoit said the rumor that his proposal for the pond was “ camouflage” for selling clay was incorrect. Benoit said he managed a KOA Campground for four years and has since looked for an opportunity to develop a Grand Island campground as he has done in Wheatfield.

“I’m not here as a developer to try to make money off a pond,” he said.

Elaine Pariso, a partner in the development, said the pond is “very important to the business plan” of the campground, and would provide vital recreation to campers.

Those in favor of the campground’s proposal also noted the positive economic impact a successful campground would provide other businesses and to the labor market.

Barbara Fick said a campground needs a pond to draw campers, and the assertion that the operation is intended as a clay mining operation was “unfair” and “totally false.”

Ed Szpala asked what safety mechanism existed should the campground fail, and “where will the funds come from to restore” the property.

McMahon explained the developer would post a surety bond “so they just can’t dig a hole and walk away.” Other issues would be answered to meet requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act.

Ken Johnson of Whitehaven Road noted his primary concern with traffic safety, saying Whitehaven Road does not have the capacity for large trucks. Clay trucks would crush the roadside, which would “essentially evict” pedestrians and bicyclists from the road.

Richard Smith scoffed at the environmental advantages extolled by the developers, which he called “a bunch of baloney.”

“There’s more here than meets the eye,” Smith said.

The board took no action at the meeting, and will continue to accept written comments on the matter until Aug. 29.

Karen Keefe contributed to this report.