Facing neighborhood opposition from Black Rock, West End and the South End, O&G Industries has revamped its proposal for a rock-crushing operation on Howard Avenue, according to postings on the “No to O&G” Facebook page. A meeting took place on Wednesday that included Economic Development Director Tom Gill, Mayor Joe Ganim’s Chief Of Staff Danny Roach and other officials to review the proposal.
O&G opposition leader Joseph Renald Provey wrote:
Today Vince Aurelia of our leadership committee and I met with Tom Gill, Bridgeport Economic and Development Director, and Danny Roach, right hand to the mayor, to hear about a new proposal from O&G. Stephanie Barnes, Black Rock NRZ president and Scott Burns, Black Rock city councilman were also present.
The meeting was called by Tom to discuss a new proposal from O&G for the Howard Ave. site. It is centered upon the idea of a totally enclosed building in which crushing would take place. Stored materials (both processed and unprocessed) would still be outside, under canopies. In exchange for approval from the city, O&G would stop all future crushing at its site on Seaview Ave. (and presumably make the land available to developers).
The leadership committee will meet on November 2 to discuss our response, but it would love to hear from all of you first. According to Tom, the mayor will not take a position on this until our position is known.
Ben Henson, who formerly worked in the city’s development office, raised a series of questions in response to Provey’s post.
How many Zoning variances/special permit approvals are they asking for? What kind of built or natural buffering will be included to protect residents in the area from airborne hazards and visual/noise pollution? How is the heavy truck traffic to be added to the neighborhood going to be mitigated? They say crushing will be stopped at the existing site. Are there actual promises being made as to the future use of that land, or simply that the crushing activity will be moved indoors, but storage, transport and dumping of materials will continue? It doesn’t sound like they’re actually doing anything to improve quality of life or improve economic development in either location.
I have been somewhat involved with this since O&G started to make their formal proposals in regards to moving to Howard Avenue although it was known a quid pro quo was existing with the Finch Administration; exit Seaview and move to Howard Ave. Enclosing the crushing operation is insufficient. We are talking about CARCINOGENIC airborne materials here. EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE ENCLOSED. This is another case where O&G (along with other companies) continue to use Bridgeport as a citywide dump. O&G has broken EVERY promise or agreement with Bridgeport about maintaining the Seaview site. O&G has a long history of non-compliance in all regards. Ideally, this should not exist in a heavily populated area. O&G should find some abandoned quarry in rural Connecticut and that is where this type of operation should be located. O&G pays the minimum on property taxes on these sites because there are no “formal” buildings. Please visit the NO TO O&G Facebook site to get a lot more information.
PLUS, O&G is quite profitable on the other Bridgeport businesses they are involved in.
Ben Henson brings up some very important questions that need to be answered, but what about the money trail, always follow the money.
“Facing neighborhood opposition?” Who? You can count them all on one hand.
barry soitera, YOU ARE DEAD WRONG.
What kind of materials will be crushed there? Who’s going to inspect these incoming materials on a daily basis? Rubble from old building sites laced with asbestos, lead, PCPs?
Materials will still have to be put on a conveyor and pile up outside, sending hazardous airborne particles everywhere, Seaside Village, Seaside Park, Went Field, neighborhood schools.
This Administration can’t be trusted!
Just remember how they flucked Black Rock on our taxes!
Jim. O&G crushes concrete and asphalt at its current site. We are assuming the same for the proposed site. Inspection is “visual,” according to the facilities manager. That strikes me as a minimal safeguard. Regardless, thus far the administration, especially the mayor, has supported our efforts.
Joe,
Ronald Reagan’s famous dictum, “Trust but Verify.”
That’s one of my favorite quotes, “Trust but Verify.”
Jim, you pushed hard for Ganim. Now suffer.
One of the stipulations should be O & G moves their corporate headquarters next to the new rock crushing site.
This way BRIDGEPORT gets a boost to its grand list and … Who am I kidding? They’d never put their execs next to an ugly mountain of shit that is a health hazard.
But demand it anyway. Make ’em squirm.
First mistake was having the meeting without:
1) Having everything in writing in advance, and
2) Not having O & G in the room.
O & G can now start trying to pick off the opposition and back-peddling on what the city said. Do not meet again in private. All meetings must be in public.
Bob, oh how true. They were set up and they don’t even know it.
Ron and Bob,
Aren’t these your own neighbors? Aren’t they arguing the issue for the benefit of all the residents who may be affected?
What is your advice to them at any point, but specifically now? Lay it out for all to see (since you bothered to provide your negative analysis on where they have arrived in your opinion at this moment).
The reason lawyers for developers have met with citizens in recent years may vary depending on the issue or the property, but they have found ignoring the public may have later negative repercussions at public hearings. Such meetings as this have no rules as do zoning types of formal meetings. The opinions from the public have no formal status but they may work like an inexpensive focus group for the party seeking a change or an opportunity. This group has been meeting off and on for what seems like six months or more. Have you tried to advise them and been rebuffed? Or are you taking on the special OIB role of know-it-all advisers or “tearleaders” (negative cheerleaders) who can be depended upon for opinions but not necessarily assistance? Time will tell.
JML, in the past some neighborhoods have made financial deals without the knowledge of the community. Sometimes an offer to donate money for a park which never happens has been made. When there was an effort to put an asphalt plant in my backyard we got no help from our council members (at that time Seaside Village was in the 130th district), no help from our State Rep. or from Mayor Ganim. It was State Rep. Chris Caruso from another district who led the fight to stop the two asphalt plants that were planned for Bridgeport. It was Chris who held meetings on Saturday mornings and he brought in an environmentalist from Massachusetts to tell us about the danger to our children and to elders. It was the State that put in a moratorium to stop the asphalt plants. Where are the experts and their reports to tell us what will be put into the air?
Great questions and genuine experience that can assist the folks on your committee. You need to get to the table. Folks like Joe and Frank can benefit from your knowledge of such subjects as can all the neighbors who depend on informed folks who care (rather than elected folks who too often care about their “name in lights,” a good meal (or some other form of compensation), the feeling of celebrity that gets confused as “power” when your photo is being sought (Saint Selfie–a 21st Century creature). Who will care for Joe and Joan Average Citizen-Taxpayer? Time will tell.
John,
Read my comments below. I told them to circulate petitions on Election Day. Lennie can tell them the busiest schools. They can easily get 5 – 10,000 signatures.
Hi Ron,
Seaside Village would be a crumbling ghost town if the asphalt plant had gone in on the adjacent property, so I commend all those who worked so hard to keep it out. Nor would SV be the sizable tax contributor it is had our property values been depressed by the plant. Today, a new asphalt plant would have to be built at least 1/3 of a mile away from a school or residence. That brings us to another subject, O&G’s asphalt plant that’s next door to PT Barnum. The city needs to work with O&G to move that facility to a more suitable site … out of Bridgeport.
I agree it would have been good to have O&G in the room. But in this day and age when you can let interested parties (NO to O&G has many hundreds) know what took place with the push of a button, it’s more difficult for them to divide and conquer.
O&G’s operation is not a fit for Bridgeport. They must relocate their operation to another municipality. Bridgeport cannot accommodate this kind of operation if it is going to upgrade its tax base.
The only thing to negotiate with O&G about their debris recycling/storage operation is a firm date for ceasing operations and for restoring the property to Residential-A conditions.
Ganim wants to negotiate on behalf of O & G, but when it comes to the BBoE boycott, he turns a blind eye!
Welcome home, Joe!
You’ve got that right, Jim. Old Joe sticks his head in the sand with the BOE but wouldn’t dare try the same with the toxic industrial waste O & G produces.
You want to talk about crushing stons; Frank, if you do have people ready to do something, get them out on Election Day circulating a petition to force O & G out of town. No new location. Out. That will get the mayor’s attention.
As I’ve said, the mayor has been supportive from day one. We will take this idea up at our next leadership committee meeting however. Thanks.
Joe, what do you mean the mayor has been supportive from day one?
Ron,
You are so right. These people met with Joe’s Economic Development Director, Joe’s campaign confidante and long-time friend and Joe’s City Council Rep.
Only one missing was Joe himself. But that is because if it blows up Joe will claim ignorance.
This offer was not made without Joe’s knowledge and approval. And the offer cannot be defined as supportive of the neighborhood’s efforts.
All crushing will be done inside. Only end product will be stored uncovered outdoors. Isn’t that what the big pile of shit is that we see in the photo?
Bob, if it’s not in writing then it didn’t happen. I don’t know about the group that was in that meeting but who asked for the meeting and what was on the agenda and who’s agenda was it and were minutes and notes taken in that meeting?
Supportive as in publicly stating O&G’s crushing facility does not belong in densely populated Bridgeport. This was at the end of a press conference back in the spring. He went on to make the point Bridgeport is challenged for space, a relatively small land area for its population. Since then he has reiterated his support several times.
Joe, I mean no disrespect but Mayor Ganim is playing you, he feels you can’t do anything to him and all he needs to do is talk to you. This is about business and if you can’t be forceful and make something happen in your favor then to hell with Ganim.
Negotiate from a position of strength, not weakness. 5,000 – 10,000 signatures is strength.
Have a down and dirty flyer to hand out to people about the pile of debris. Then ask them to sign the petition. Quick and easy. They can read the flyer as they wait in line.
Money talks and bullshit walks. Here we go again.