If the County Council does not act before Aug. 23, Fred Weber Inc.’s rezoning request for its south quarry automatically will be denied without ever being considered by councilmen, according to a company attorney.
Fred Weber filed an application to construct a trash-transfer station at 4200 Baumgartner Road in the company’s south quarry in Oakville days before a moratorium on the issuance of licenses for waste-processing facilities took effect last fall.
The St. Louis County Health Department recently halted consideration of the trash-transfer application because Fred Weber has not yet established the appropriate zoning for the station that would be built in the quarry.
Fred Weber submitted a request last year to the Planning Commission to rezone a 24.9-acre tract to the Flood-Plain Planned Industrial District from the Flood-Plain Non-Urban District.
The tract is about 300 feet southeast of Baumgartner Road, east of the Burlington Railroad and bounded by the Meramec River to the southwest. The 6,400 square-foot structure that would serve as the trash-transfer station would be constructed 40 feet tall and made of metal, according to Fred Weber Inc., with a 500-ton daily capacity.
But the Planning Commission unanimously agreed to recommend denial of the application to the County Council, which has the final authority on county zoning matters.
The Planning Commission cited environmental concerns for the Meramec River and Mattese Creek as justification for its denial recommendation.
Councilmen unanimously agreed to receive and file the Planning Commission’s report May 25, giving the council 90 days to consider Fred Weber’s pending zoning request.
No councilman has requested that legislation be drafted that would either approve or reject Fred Weber’s petition. If councilmen continue to let the report sit idle, under the County Charter, Fred Weber’s rezoning request will be dropped from the council’s agenda and automatically will be denied.
In that case, Fred Weber would have to wait nine months — one year from the May 25 submission of the Planning Commission’s report to the Council — until it could request a similar rezoning request on the same tract in its south quarry.
If Fred Weber’s south quarry is not compliant with the appropriate zoning regulations for a trash-transfer station, it would be inappropriate for the health department to issue a license, according to County Counselor Pat Redington.
That is why Gary Feder of Husch & Eppenberger, an attorney who represents Fred Weber, is trying to buy some time for the zoning application.
Feder recently sent a letter to County Executive Charlie Dooley and all county councilmen, requesting that a resolution be drafted Aug. 10 that would extend the amount of time councilmen would have to consider Fred Weber’s rezoning request before it is automatically denied past Aug. 23.
The County Council’s first meeting after a three-week annual break was scheduled for Monday, Aug. 10 — after the Call went to press.
“Such a resolution would not commit the council to actually take up the matter if it chooses not to do so in the future,” Feder stated in the Aug. 5 letter sent to county officials. “However, it would give the council the option of considering the issue further in terms of a fully developed and critiqued plan, which could easily be evaluated by the entire council or its Public Improvements Committee.”
Because the Planning Commission also is considering a request from west county’s Onyx Oakridge Landfill to increase its height by 70 feet, Feder contends, the importance of considering the rezoning request for Fred Weber’s south quarry is “amplified” as the county continues to study solid-waste issues.
“It seems to me … there clearly is a connection between the extension and expansion of landfills on one side and a desire to build trash-transfer stations on the other,” Feder told the Call. “… It’s part of the same question. From Weber’s perspective, there is a reluctance to continue the life of landfills in the county, but if we don’t expand existing landfills, you have to deal effectively with the limited amount of landfills you have.”
With fewer landfills, the consideration of the Fred Weber’s proposed trash-transfer station becomes relevant, Feder said, because the county will have to face the problem of getting more and more trash to Fred Weber’s landfill in north county.
“If you don’t have trash-transfer stations in south county, you’ll have a large number of trucks on the road in south county,” he said. “… It seems to me a pretty good argument that if you’re going to turn down the Onyx landfill … at some point you’re going to have to do something, expand landfills … or build trash-transfer stations.”
“That’s why to me this relates,” he added.
But County Councilman John Campisi, R-south county, still has no intention of introducing legislation that would address Fred Weber’s rezoning request.
Regarding a resolution that would extend the life of Fred Weber’s zoning proposal, Campisi said he’s done it before for other companies that needed extra time to revise their proposals — but he won’t do it for Fred Weber.
“No. We’re done,” Campisi told the Call. “We’ve had our PIC meetings. We’ve had our constituent meetings. We’ve had planning and zoning meetings. Everything says no. No. No. No … We’ve already received and filed it. It’s finished as far as I’m concerned. It’s finished.”
There is no reason to give the company’s zoning petition more time for consideration, he said.
He added, “Enough is enough.”
While legislation typically is introduced by the councilman of the district in which the property is located, Feder said, Fred Weber is hopeful that the resolution would be introduced by someone outside of the 6th District.
“I understand Councilman Campisi’s position … is not likely to change,” Feder said. “I’ve never been certain why Mr. Campisi wouldn’t want to bring the matter up before the council … Frankly, I’ve always wondered why he wouldn’t want an opportunity to further express himself … And the only way for that to happen is through the introduction of legislation.”
The County Council has many options, Feder said, of which include referring the matter to a committee, waiting to consider the matter at a later date or conducting a public hearing.
“But they shouldn’t let it die without doing anything about it,” he said. “To me, that’s not a smart way to go about it.”
Feder said he has received no indication that any other councilmen are planning to draft a resolution that would extend the life of Fred Weber’s petition beyond Aug. 23.
“Weber would certainly prefer prompt review of the rezoning application given the apparent unwillingness of the Department of Health to make a determination on the companion license application pending before it,” Feder stated in the letter. “However, even if the matter cannot be considered until the end of the year or in early 2005, we believe the County Council would be serving its constituents well by allowing this request to be heard and eventually voted on.”
Asked what Fred Weber’s next course of action would be if the petition is automatically denied without an extension, Feder said, “Candidly, one of our choices would be to file a lawsuit …”
“Get in line,” Campisi told the Call.
Fred Weber already is challenging in court the county’s denial of a trash-transfer station application for 5219 Baumgartner Road and a 1,000-foot restriction, which regulated the distance between waste-processing facilities and schools, residences, churches, child- and adult-care facilities and other similar structures.