Is Applying for Mineral Mining Rights within the City Limits of Cleveland Newsworthy?

Submitted by Gloria Ferris on Fri, 03/19/2010 - 21:44.

It would probably depend on your viewpoint.  I would say that the residents on Sky Lane and near Bradley Road would be very interested in Mineral Mining Permit #10428.  The public notice for this application was placed in the Plain Dealer beginning in February.  I went on line to www.Cleveland.com to find one of the public notices by scanning the classifieds but gave it up as a futile endeavor.  The public notices are included with the classifieds and not searchable as far as I could tell.

I decided to call the Ohio Department of Natural Resources to ask for a copy of the permit application.  The very helpful state employee told me that the original application could have been revised several times so that the one he had available to send might not have up-to-the-minute information. He said he would answer my questions if he could.

Who applied for the permit?   Ty Inc. out of Independence Ohio

Where were the public notices advertised? They advertised in the Plain Dealer that they would be mining for sand and clay.

He suggested that he tell me what they planned to do.  They will be using heavy equipment to extract the sand and clay.  This will be open pit mining .  In an open pit mining situation,the site must be reclaimed.  They plan to use the soil and restore the site to a condition as close to original as possible.

 What is the time frame? It is a fifteen year permit.

How do they plan to reclaim the site?  It will be an open, vegetative site with a big pond.  He told me it actually would be a water impoundment feature.  He began to explain what water impoundment is. I asked him if it was like  water impoundment used when strip mining for coal.  The answer was: yes.  He then went on to tell me that the contouring  would be a 3/1slope and rolled erosion webbing around the water impoundment would be used. 

How large of an area are we talking about?  He said well, it is pretty large.  8 and 1/2 acres.  They intend to mine 30,000 tons of clay and soil and expect to reach gray silt at 12 ft with an ending depth of 24 feet  with the average being 20 feet.  The area is along Sky Lane and Bradley Road.

The last thing he told me is VERY IMPORTANTThe DEADLINE for public comment is March 31st. Here is the address to send letters with questions, concerns, and a request for a public hearing to:

Chief John Husted
Ohio Department of Natural Resources
Division of Mineral Resources Management
2045 Morse Road,  Building H3
Columbus, OH 43229-6693
 

So here are some questions :

 How will the strip mining effect residents of Sky Lane and Bradley Roads?
Will the ecosystems of two creeks be compromised?  What will ensure that they are not? 
What particulate matter will be added to the atmosphere?
What will be the effect on the water table and the watershed?
If this permit is granted, will this set a precedent for other vacant land within the city limits of Cleveland?What is the assurance that Ty inc. has the expertise for such an undertaking?

Is the EPA involved in the vetting of this application? Where and when do they step in?

What rights does the city of Cleveland and its citizens have in such a matter?
 

I talked to Councilman Brancatelli who has objected to the application. Monday, March 22 Councilman Brancatelli will formally oppose this application at the City Council meeting so that the City Law Department can take the objection forward.  Councilman Brancatelli has also requested a public hearing but does not know when and where it will be held  yet. 

 I do know from my talk with the state employee that a public hearing is usually held within two weeks after the deadline date.  In this case, March 31.  he said that the downside to a public meeting is that sometimes not all people are able to speak because of time constraints.  He said that letters of objection sent until March 31will be considered and that these letters should be sent.  he said the best way to be heard is to write a letter with concerns  and request a public hearing so that a lot of questions can be answered beforehand and included in information at the public hearing.

There are two things we can do:

1. WRITE a letter of Objection that requests a public hearing to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources 
2. ATTEND Monday’s City Council meeting and support Councilman Brancatelli.

Is this newsworthy? I believe it is.  Every resident of the city of Cleveland and beyond should  know about this mineral mining rights application that would approve mining within city limits. But how will they know?  I  am pushing this information out to as many people as possible.  If you agree, take the time to write a letter requesting a public hearing. Send the information to others who you think will want to support Councilman Brancatelli’s efforts. Find out as much as you can about this latest assault on the residents of Sky Lane and Cleveland.   

( categories: )

Mining in the City of Cleveland precedent

Thank you Gloria--it seems to me that federal National Environmental Protection Act laws are trampled everyday--

Good questions that deserve answers:

 1.)How will the strip mining effect residents of Sky Lane and Bradley Roads?
2.) Will the ecosystems of two creeks be compromised?  What will ensure that they are not? 
3.) What particulate matter will be added to the atmosphere?
4.) What will be the effect on the water table and the watershed?
 

If this permit is granted, will this set a precedent for other vacant land within the city limits of Cleveland?

What is the assurance that Ty inc. has the expertise for such an undertaking?

Is the EPA involved in the vetting of this application? Where and when do they step in?

What rights does the city of Cleveland and its citizens have in such a matter?
 

I would also be worried about noise pollution

I would also be worried about noise pollution (like Mittal has complaints) and impact of all the heavy machinery and trucks on city streets and infrastructure (where are all those heavy dumptrucks of dirt going?).

Sounds aweful.

Disrupt IT

Monday Cleveland Council meeting 3.22.2010

Please attend to protest Mining Permit in Old Brooklyn (see above posts) and better, yet ride down to ask for improved bicycle transportation in the City of Cleveland--


Please join the last, best, chance to win bike/pedestrian access on the new
I-90 bridge!

At a citizen's rally this Monday, March 22nd at 6:30pm on the steps of
Cleveland City Hall, every additional person can have a big impact in
support of a well-designed, safe, separated lane for cyclists and
pedestrians on the new I-90 innerbelt bridge -- and on the future of
equitable treatment for "alternative transportation" in our region, and in
our State.

There are three objectives for this rally:

1. Immediately after the rally, citizens will attend the 7pm City
Council meeting where a resolution is expected to be introduced expressing
Council's desire for an additional "design alternative" for bike and
pedestrian access on the bridge, similar to that passed by the Cleveland
Planning Commission on January 22nd 2010.  Though Council does not
usually accept public comment on its resolutions, a large presence of
citizens in support of this resolution will have an strong effect,
especially as it could be passed immediately, under suspension of procedural
rules requiring prior committee review, if enough Council members are
present.
2. On Tuesday, March 23rd, ODOT (the Ohio Department of Transportation)
will announce the three finalist [4]Design-Build Teams (DBTs), who will
each be paid $1 million to prepare, by August 5th, 30% complete design plans
for the bridge. ODOT will then choose the final contracting team from among
these three DBT's, and will be able to incorporate designs from any of the
three finalists in their specifications.  ODOT has been requested to simply
add an "addendum" to their instructions to the DBT's allowing them to design
accommodations for cyclists and pedestrians on the bridge itself, as an
additional "design alternative" to ODOT's planned accommodations on Abbey
Avenue and the Hope Memorial bridges (all federally-funded road projects are
required to give reasonable consideration to cyclist and pedestrians'
needs).

At the rally, citizens will be asking the Design-Build Teams to include
non-motorized access to the bridge as a design alternative whether ODOT
includes it as an addendum or not: mounting popular and political pressure
make it likely that this facility will eventually be included, and the DBTs
can show responsible stewardship of taxpayer's money by designing it in the
30% design phase, so it does not need to be added in the later,
less-flexible, contractor design process.

3. Strong popular support is needed now to show ODOT, our political
leaders, and the press that this issue is not going away.  There are many
reasons why this facility is good for Cleveland, the region, and the
country.  More than 30 other cities in the U.S. have gotten space for
non-motorized users on interstate freeway bridges, but, despite years of
proper, official public comment; reasonable and professional design
suggestions; and several recent months of advocates' hard work in the press
and with politicians, ODOT still refuses to consider this sensible,
economical feature in its reconstruction of one of Cleveland's main
arteries.

_Adding an exceptional showing of public enthusiasm, and Council's formal
support_, to that of the Cleveland Planning Commission, Governor Strickland,
Senator Sherrod Brown, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, the Plain Dealer, and
scores of local businesses and civic organizations -- and doing so before
the DBTs begin their design work -- may be the last best chance to make this
good idea a reality without the risk of delaying the much-needed
replacement of this bridge. Elsewhere, bike/ped access has been added to
similar projects after the 90% design stage.  ODOT should not wait that
long.

There will be public "involvement" meetings during the design-build process
about minor aesthetic design features, but this is the last, best, chance
for the public to speak up forcefully in support of equal access for all
citizens to this $450 million bridge that we all are paying for.  This
should be a bridge for all -- for people in cars, trucks and busses; but
also for those who don't own a car, who choose not to drive everywhere, or
who just want to walk or bike between Tremont and Downtown for their health,
for the great view, or for a change.

For more information about this issue see

www.gcbl.org/innerbelt

EDITORIAL NOTE: I personally do not see this happening, unless the Inner Belt bridge is designated for lower speeds and not considered an interstate highway.  If the City is to build a bridge specifically for cyclists--I would much prefer that the City restore the Clark Pershing Bridge over the Cuyahoga River.