A recent proposal to construct a gravel pit near Siphon Road west of Chubbuck was recently voted down by the Bannock County Planning and Development Council after hundreds of local residents voiced their opposition.
The verdict has since been appealed, with the applicant, John Wilkes of Idaho Materials and Construction, which is a subsidiary of Staker Parson Companies, citing it “was not allowed to provide prepared evidence to address the concerns offered by the opposition.”
The appeal will be heard by the Bannock County Commissioners at a hearing set for 11 a.m. Oct. 17 at the county courthouse in Pocatello. There will be no public comment allowed during the appeal hearing but the commissioners will review the public comments previously submitted about the project before making a final decision on the appeal.
The first hearing on the proposed gravel pit was scheduled for July but after the planning and development council chambers were packed shoulder to shoulder with Pocatello and Chubbuck residents, many of them spilling into the hallways, the meeting was rescheduled for Aug. 10 at Chubbuck City Hall to accommodate the expected massive number of people in attendance.
The gravel pit was proposed to operate from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday with a potential variance for running on Sunday.
At the Aug. 10 meeting gravel pit officials presented their side, mostly spending the allotted time to address many of the general health, safety and noise complaints that were voiced previously by those in opposition. The planning and development council’s members then asked the questions they had, gathering information on specific details and verifying legal precedence on the matter.
The parcel of land where the proposed gravel pit would be located is just under 160 acres and is situated at West Siphon Road and North Laughran Road. Generally, the land immediately around the proposed site is sparsely populated but to the east there are a large number of residential homes.
Many of the complaints about the gravel pit at the August meeting were varied in their subject matter. An increase in truck traffic carrying gravel loads, the use of an on-site well that could potentially dry up surrounding residential wells, silica dust and other particulates blown around by Idaho’s turbulent winds, and general noise and wildlife disruption were some of the most brought up issues.
Discussions on the legalities of the permit and its applications to the site were brought up as well. Local resident Mark Stenberg touched on the fact that the parcel is currently zoned for mining, not processing and any processing and extracting of materials on the parcel would require a zoning change.
Stenberg and a few other citizens also said the gravel pit would violate the development council’s 2020 comprehensive plan. The plan “articulates goals, objectives and policies that will support a 20-year vision to be an economically vibrant county that encourages sustainable development while enhancing Bannock County’s rural, recreational and agricultural character.”
The life span of the gravel pit would put it at around 25 years of use. Many in opposition referenced the current gravel extraction areas around Pocatello and Chubbuck and how many mined out sites are in a perpetual limbo of being “active” despite very little actual work going on and no back-filling being done to reverse the damage to the parcels.
Testimonies continued until a large handful had expressed their views and hundreds of other written testimonies were submitted into the record expressing their dissent. The gravel pit applicants were then granted only three minutes to give a retort, after which the development council could again ask questions and check the validity of claims.
The development council then voted 3-1 to deny the gravel pit application.
The decision was met by cheers from the crowd who had shown up in force and had attended the meeting from its beginning all the way into the late evening.
However, many of the gravel pit’s detractors felt that with the appeal process, the victory could be only temporary.
Dennis and Anna Marie Hauser, who own adjoining property 600 feet along the east side of the proposed gravel pit, reflected on the judgement.
“There should be some criteria,” said Dennis Hauser. “A conditional use permit opens a huge discussion when there should just be a simple checklist on what qualifies for a gravel pit. The original proposal I was in full support of. What they’re proposing now is just mineral extraction.... The comprehensive use plan doesn’t permit this, except under conditional use and conditional use is a poor method of planning.”