Glocester council renews JR Venagro earth‑removal license after neighbors raise blasting concerns

The Glocester Town Council on November 18 renewed an earth‑removal license for JR Venagro Corporation for a two‑year period and imposed a $20,000 surety bond and compliance with Gloucester Code Chapter 166.

Neighbors told the council the company’s blasting has caused new or worsening foundation cracks, damaged stone hearths and kitchen islands, shaken homes and disrupted sleep. Gregory Gable, who identified himself as an adjacent property owner, said the blasts have left cracks in several of his buildings and that attempts to obtain readings and follow‑up from the State Fire Marshal were frustrating and incomplete. "It was rattling my building; I'm the closest neighbor," Gable said during the hearing.

Multiple residents asked about seismograph placement, public access to readings and pre‑blast baseline surveys for older houses. Angela Earhart said a recent blast was “scarier than a lot of the earthquakes I’ve been in” and described cracks appearing in stonework and interior finishes.

Company representatives and consultants told the council they had recently switched blasting methods and subcontractors and are using electronic detonators, smaller blast patterns and pre‑blast surveys to reduce vibration. Steve Landry, who said he manages the Venagro site, described the use of laser profiling, crack gauges, and third‑party seismograph monitoring and provided a direct contact number for residents ((978) 496‑5764). Kevin Broder, identified as JR Venagro’s environmental director, said quarterly groundwater and wetlands monitoring by EA Engineering has shown no change in groundwater levels attributable to site activity and that monitoring reports are available via FOIA. He provided a company number ((401) 578‑2036) for concerns.

Councilors asked about the placement and public availability of seismograph data; company staff said third‑party monitoring data goes to state regulators and that the company will arrange pre‑blast surveys for residents who request them.

After receiving testimony from residents and company representatives, a councilor moved to grant the license renewal with conditions including the $20,000 surety bond and adherence to town ordinance requirements. The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote.

The council’s action renews the permit but preserves the town’s ability to take enforcement steps if future blasts exceed permitted limits or produce credible complaints; council members noted that a show‑cause procedure can be brought if violations occur. The company said it will continue outreach to residents before blasts and arrange pre‑blast surveys to establish baselines.