Representatives of Sidewinder presenting the concept plan to the Planning Commission on November 12 2024.
It took more than four hours to hear 56 public comments on the Mountain Pure bottling plant concept plan during the November 12 Jefferson County Planning Commission public workshop attended by approximately 150 people. All 56 commenters voiced concerns and opposition to the plan — there were no public comments in support of it.
The Mountain Pure concept plan for a 1 million square foot bottling facility was first submitted to the Planning & Zoning Office on September 27, 2024 (file # 24-29-SD), listing Sidewinder Enterprises, LLC of Newport Beach, California as the property owner. The concept plan also included a subdivision plan for a single 260-acre property located at 1 Grace Street in Middleway, which is zoned Industrial-Commercial. According to Planning & Zoning staff, the concept plan sketch submitted on September 27 showed the property subdivided into 6 parcels, which was inconsistent with the waiver Sidewinder had received from the Planning Commission in August 2023 to allow the property to be subdivided into 4 parcels.
Sidewinder submitted a revised concept plan sketch on October 7. This plan for the property showed the site subdivided into 4 parcels: a 37-acre parcel (Phase 1 Bottling Facility 304,000 sq-ft), a 74-acre parcel (Phase 2 Bottling Facility 696,000 sq-ft), a 1.6 acre parcel (future water treatment facility), and a 147-acre parcel that encompasses the former 3M facility, Turkey Run, and stormwater management areas.
Concerns About Water & Traffic
The public comments during the November 12 workshop focused on two major concerns, that the water extraction would harm neighboring landowners by depleting the aquifer, and that the additional traffic described in the concept plan notes would cause an undue hardship on the property owners in Middleway.
Following the public comment, the Commission invited the company’s representative, Mark Dyck of Integrity Federal Services, to respond. Dyck disclosed that the company has already drilled three wells on a nearby parcel currently zoned “Rural” and intends to construct a pipeline through the Middleway village to connect the wells with the bottling facility. In response to the water use concerns, Dyck proffered several assurances to monitor and replace wells of adjacent landowners under certain conditions.
Regarding the traffic, Dyck referred to the WV Department of Highway’s plan to install a signal at the Route 51 & Leetown Road intersection (in place of the existing blinking signal) but dismissed the concerns of heavy truck traffic through the narrow roads of the historic Middleway village, citing a lack of evidence that traffic can cause harm to old structures.
Commissioners Question Missing Details
Following Dyck’s responses, the planning commissioners spent another hour discussing the project. The staff report had deemed the concept plan complete, but the commissioners seemed concerned about the lack of disclosure about the water source and the legality of extracting water from a property in the Rural Zone for use outside of that rural property. In the end, the missing information was the justification that the Planning Commission referenced in rejecting the concept plan.
A Vote to Reject
After four hours of comment and discussion, the commissioners took a vote (transcription is from the meeting video):
[Commissioner Keys states motion]
We find this plan, insufficient
[Commissioner Stolpher interrupts] incomplete
[Keys continues] – incomplete and would like to motion that we table it
[Commissioner Shepp interrupts] No, deny it.
Send it back. They have to start over.
[Keys] OK
[Shepp] As I understand it.
[Keys continues] – due to the lack of parcels included for the whole site.
[Keys restates motion]
I’d like to make a motion that this is incomplete. We would like to send this back to have this redone to include all the parcels moving forward.
[Commissioner Louthan seconds motion]
[Shepp asks if any further discussion, calls the vote & announces motion passes (unanimous)]
The Commisioners Reasoning
Afterwards, Commissioner Keys summarized the reasoning behind her motion: “The Planning Commission voted to reject based on insufficient information. This was a final decision on this plan, but the applicant can submit a different plan.”
By Steve Pearson