Lake association hires outside consultant to review application
By Megan Plete Postol
Frustration continues for property owners around White Lake, as the application for the proposed granite quarry is being considered by New York State’s Department of Conservation (DEC) and Adirondack Park Agency (APA).
Town of Forestport Supervisor TJ Entwistle shared a couple of updates concerning the project at a town board meeting on June 16. Entwistle reported that the DEC had announced that it was classifying the project as a Type 2 project, meaning that a full environmental study was not necessary and would not be completed. He also explained that the application’s fate is controlled by the APA and DEC. If the quarry is approved by those two entities, it then comes to the town of Forestport only for regulation such as traffic and signage. He did, say, however, that if it comes to that, the town will hold a public hearing, as it would for any business permit application.
“Our heart is in this,” Entwistle said. “Anyone who knows me knows that I try to go the extra mile. This board has the interests of the people of the town of Forestport at heart. We are duty-bound to ensure that every application is given fair and due consideration.”
Subscribe to the Adirondack Explorer app for only $8!
Access a year’s worth of content from Adirondack Explorer magazine
on your mobile device, which includes our annual Outings Guide.
Use the code EXPLORE at checkout
Approximately 50 people attended the meeting. Several stakeholders spoke about concerns and actions. The Adirondack White Lake Association (AWLA), a group of property owners that aim to conserve, protect, monitor, and safely regulate the resources of White Lake, have hired a consultant to investigate the proposal and offer an objective perspective.
“The goal of the expert is to get an independent, third-party review of what is proposed in the application,” said Courtney Wellar, President of the White Lake Association. “The idea being not to promote and not to be adverse, but to know what is real in regards to the potential impacts or risks to the community are. Our mission with the association is to protect the lake.”
Peter Chamboro, of South Shore Road, believes that the quarry project is not a good fit for White Lake. He read an excerpt from the town of Forestport’s draft strategic plan.
“Our main vision of our wonderful community is to preserve the rural character here for the health and wellbeing of the people that reside here and are attracted to this area for the purpose of living in an environment of clean air, clean water, and open space.”— Peter Chamboro, town of Forestport resident
“Our main vision of our wonderful community is to preserve the rural character here for the health and wellbeing of the people that reside here and are attracted to this area for the purpose of living in an environment of clean air, clean water, and open space,” he said. “Now we have a quarry being proposed. It’s not just a quarry; they are going to clear cut, they are going to dig holes. That’s the picture being painted. And where is it!? Right along the southern border of a beautiful, pristine, crystal clear lake.”
Chamboro said that the quarry application is overly simplistic, with many unanswered questions. He wants more specific answers to the questions that property owners have, such as He requested that the board seek more information. He also suggested that the town of Forestport look into adopting a strategic plan with more stringent regulation.
“I know that nobody wants to hear about regulation,” he said. “But what are we going to do when people take advantage of us? We need better regulation, better oversight.”
why would the opening of a quarry in the adirondacks even be a question? allowing explosives residues, which are toxic, to run into water ways and down stream. the destruction on a massive scale of the enviroment.. The entire point of Adirondacks was to curb the development and protect the very fabric of being a true wilderness…
To completely overlook enviromental impact study??? WHO paid who off?
This is where APA should be saying “NO” immediately!!!!