THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Monday, March 20, 1995 TAG: 9503200065
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY FRANCIE LATOUR, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: CHESAPEAKE LENGTH: Long : 128 lines
More than election politics or budget slashing, one curious phenomenon in Chesapeake seems to galvanize residents into action: big holes in the ground.
The borrow pit issue once again will come before the City Council on Tuesday. Now, at least one past opponent of borrow pits says it is time for residents to reconsider their traditional knee-jerk response.
Borrow pits - expansive holes excavated by developers - have been seen as a necessary evil throughout the city's 32-year history.
Necessary because so much of Chesapeake is flat. That forces builders to draw on sand underground to build major projects, from bypasses to subdivisions.
Evil because the pits generate traffic, noise and dust from the constant loop of dump trucks. And once filled with water, the deep and often unsupervised holes are an invitation for swimmers and fishers, including children. Many people have drowned in borrow pits.
In the past, the drawbacks have spurred residents to protest the pits. In 1989, organized residents got council members to reverse themselves and deny a borrow pit previously approved for southern Chesapeake.
But the necessity may now outweigh the evil that has given borrow pits their stigma, some leaders say.
``What has changed is that we have a lot of capital building needs with roads and schools, and that dirt is going to have to come from somewhere,'' said Vice Mayor Arthur L. Dwyer.
On Tuesday, the City Council will consider a permit request by BJB Partnership to dig a 30-acre, 60-foot-deep borrow pit along South Battlefield Boulevard, near the city's Northwest Water Treatment Plant. The pit would put slow-moving trucks on the road for up to 250 trips a day for the next seven years.
The Planning Commission and the city's planning staff have recommended that the council deny the request.
Foremost among their concerns, and those of residents, is the impact the trucks would have on a road the city has declared a top priority: South Battlefield Boulevard.
``Simply put, the traffic already here is not going to be able handle these trucks,'' said Robert Pillers, whose property would be 250 feet from the proposed pit.
Pillers, who runs his business from his home, has lived there for 12 years.
``The trucks are not going to be able to get onto the highway safely, and, because of that, neither is anybody else.''
The stretch of road from the Great Bridge bypass to the North Carolina line was built to handle 7,700 vehicles a day, but the two-lane road carries more than 18,000 a day, according to Public Works statistics.
During the summer tourist season, traffic can shoot up to three times the road's capacity.
The impact of trucks on that traffic would be exacerbated by the fact that the pit doesn't serve any specific construction project nearby.
``If you have a project destination of where the sand is going to,'' said Timothy Howlett, a city planner,'' then we know exactly where the trucks are going and the impact on traffic is minimal. If there's no target destination, all we know is that it's going to negatively impact a lot of local roads.''
As the state's fastest-growing city embarks on $180 million in road and school projects, developers say site-specific borrow pits are no longer realistic.
``The need for fill is all across Chesapeake,'' said J. Gregory Dodd, principal owner of the building firm Horton & Dodd, P.C. in Chesapeake.
``You can't have a borrow pit next to every road project or subdivision.''
Dodd estimated that the city will need between 1 million and 3 million cubic yards of fill this year. He also said the four active borrow pits in the city aren't enough to meet that demand.
As Chesapeake's sand supply continues to dwindle, the cost of that ever-increasing demand grows, he said.
``The farther away you have to go to get the sand,'' Dodd said, ``the more you pay for it. Everyone has the perception that there is plenty of supply, but there really isn't.''
That added expense would come at a time when officials are more concerned about paying back the city's debt and have called for greater fiscal restraint.
``A year ago, I was not in support of this particular borrow pit,'' Dwyer said.
``But a year ago, we didn't have all the capital projects that are coming on line now. . . . We are going to have to weigh a lot of the benefits vs. the stigma that is still attached to the borrow pits.''
Dwyer estimated the city could save up to $1 million if it stayed inside city limits for sand.
While the safety hazards and congestion on Battlefield Boulevard cannot be denied, Dwyer said those problems could exist even if the council denies the pit on Tuesday. ``Right on the other side of the Carolina line they've approved a borrow pit that is on the way,'' Dwyer said. ``So the issue of traffic is moot right now: If we don't get a borrow pit in our city, there's going to be trucks coming in here from another state on Route 168.''
The city would not be able to control the hours those North Carolina trucks could travel or collect the standard $3 tax for every truckload of sand from borrow pits within the city.
Dwyer said the pit could bring the city other benefits, including a 5 billion gallon reservoir once the developer dedicates the lake to the city.
Other leaders said those benefits did not outweigh the sacrifice residents and businesses would make with more traffic on Battlefield Boulevard.
``I'm not going to support it until 168 gets approved, and that's it,'' said Councilman Peter P. Duda. ``Once definitive plans on 168 come on line, then I'll consider it. We don't need that reservoir for another 20 years.''
Mayor William E. Ward said the council must also weigh the harm that the pit could cause the treatment plant.
``It could add water,'' Ward said, ``but it could hurt the existing water supply or the structures the plant is built on when they drain the water.''
For residents, Pillers said, the cost also would be great.
``They want to put a 50-foot deep hole in front of my house,'' Pillers said. ``I don't think anyone would want that.''
Pillers said the pit would violate city codes that require a distance of 1,000 feet from adjacent property. Dodd is asking for a 250-foot separation from Pillers' home.
``I'm assuming a health risk for me and so will my family,'' said Pillers, referring to the potential hazards of lung disease from sand and dust.
``What bothers me more than anything is that the developers can keep coming back every year until they get what they want,'' Pillers said.
``As long as I live here, this thing is going to be facing me. They know they only have to win once, but the residents have to win every time to keep the pits away.'' ILLUSTRATION: [Color Photo]
FILE PHOTO
This borrow pit near a shopping center in Chesapeake's Greenbrier
section sparked controversy last year because of the number of
trucks that traveled to and from it daily.
by CNB