A proposed gravel operation in front of the city council didn’t pass muster when it was held up to borough standards.
The application would allow Mat-Su Gravel Products to remove 1.5 million cubic yards of soil and aggregates for 10 to 12 years. About 50 acres of hills and ridges would be leveled off a 70-acre tract split by the Parks Highway just north of the fireworks stands.
 ROBERT DeBERRY/Frontiersman Mat-Su Gravel Products wants to remove 1.5 million cubic yards of soil and aggregates over a period of 10 to 12 years from this 50-acre tract of hills and ridges just north of the fireworks stands along the Parks Highway. |
Because the land is zoned as residential, or R1, Denevan had to file for a conditional land-use permit for commercial extraction of earth materials. Until recently, the application would have gone to the Mat-Su Borough’s planning commission and assembly and would have been subject to their regulations regarding gravel operations.
However, because the borough’s new gravel ordinance exempts Houston, Wasilla and Palmer, and because Houston gained land-use and zoning rights within its city limits, the application passes through the city’s planning commission and council for approval.
As the city does not share the borough’s level of regulation for gravel extraction, this has many parties concerned.
Julia Normand, long-time critic of Houston’s current administration, said she is not against development or gravel mining, but this operation is in the wrong place. Much of the area is marshy wetlands, and Cheri Creek runs the length of the parcel before it drains into Long Lake.
“I’m in favor of gravel pits, but that’s a gorgeous area,” Normand said. “I’m afraid the mayor, who is trying to make his own political career while stomping on the city, is trying to raise revenue without thinking about the consequences.”
Past Mayor Sandy McDonald said there may be some holes in the city’s land-use and zoning policies. She said they passed the policy when it was incomplete saying the planning commission would fill it in once enacted. However, she has not seen it come back before the city council with the necessary changes.
“If this gravel pit goes through and is passed prior to any zone changes or notification to the residents,” McDonald said, “that would be a concern.”
For his part, Mayor Roger Purcell said the city’s current planning powers are still a bit of a gray area. Houston is still in the process of getting all the planning powers transferred from the borough. However, because the city is exempt from the gravel ordinance, he said his understanding is they do have the power to grant the permit.
As for the operation itself, Purcell said has not had a chance to review the whole application yet, but he does support it based on his preliminary understanding.
“It’s just removing a hill. It does not go into the water table. I don’t really see any adverse impacts with this one whatsoever,” Purcell said.
The application does say a pond will be built on the site, and any uncontaminated water pumped for excavation purposes will enter that pond. However, the application says the company does not expect to pump any water, saying the pond will be filled by water seeping in from Cheri Creek.
Storm water runoff will be directed to the center of the excavation, Denevan said, and the composition of the soil is perfect for acting as a natural filter. The application calls for a 20-foot buffer of natural vegetation along the length of the creek, and this could increase in more vulnerable places, Denevan said.
Silt fences are to be placed at the Parks Highway culvert and the extreme southern end of the project just before the creek leaves the property.
“We’re not in this to try to destroy. We’re trying to leave a very appealing product for development when were done,” Denevan said.
Because of these precautions, the Army Corps of Engineers said the mining practices on the site would be consistent with the Clean Water Act. While the site contains wetlands, the Corps determined the activity “would not involve discharge of fill material in waters of the United States.”
The borough disagrees. If this application came in front of its planning commission, it would undoubtedly be rejected, said Pamela Ness, code compliance officer for the borough. The borough requires a 100-foot buffer between mining activity and any open water source. It also requires mining to remain at least four feet above the water table so as to protect it against contamination from silt.
This application does not have the required buffer, Ness said, and it is unrealistic to think no runoff from the mine site will enter Cheri Creek without getting a complete hydrology report.
“I haven’t seen where anyone went out and did a study. My question to him is where did he come up with that information,” Ness said.
What’s worse, she said, is that filling the pond with seepage from Cheri Creek shows they are digging well within the water table and risk contaminating the local aquifer.
“But they just have to comply with the city of Houston’s code, which is very lax in my opinion,” Ness said. “It would be nice if we could stop them, but the application only comes to us for our recommendation.”
Staff reports from code compliance and other borough departments are complied by Susan Lee, planner for the borough. Lee will then decide what the borough’s official recommendation to the city will be, a decision she has yet to deliver.
The Houston Planning and Zoning Committee gave the application a favorable recommendation after their meeting Thursday. There is a public hearing on the application for July 9 at 5 p.m. Enough city council members, including Purcell, will be absent then that the city council’s vote has been postponed to July 16.
Contact Todd L. Disher at todd.disher@frontiersman.com or 352-2252.
Comments
22 comment(s)just a thought wrote on Jul 7, 2009 11:18 AM:
Norm wrote on Jul 4, 2009 11:44 PM:
People of Houston, please stop and think, is dust and destruction really the legacy we want to leave for our next generations?
Is short term, finite, material gain for the few reason enough to destroy the residential property values, and natural resources of many generations? "
just a thought wrote on Jul 3, 2009 10:56 PM:
ben jones wrote on Jun 29, 2009 11:19 PM:
ben jones wrote on Jun 29, 2009 11:00 PM:
GOOD IDEA wrote on Jun 29, 2009 9:09 PM:
I'll bet if I took a a copy of your comment and a photo of you back in time, I could talk your grandparents out of mating for life!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA "
Tad Parcell wrote on Jun 29, 2009 3:22 PM:
These people have no idea what they are talking about..and they have the gall to say the Army Corp of Engineers is wrong?
Better yet lets buy them a time machine and send them back before roads were build. With them in charge no one would be able to prosper and we wouldn't even be here. "
Jan Dickenson wrote on Jun 29, 2009 3:17 PM:
Tim Triumph wrote on Jun 29, 2009 2:40 PM:
ben jones wrote on Jun 28, 2009 10:57 PM:
Houston Voter wrote on Jun 28, 2009 10:49 PM:
Houston Resident wrote on Jun 28, 2009 7:39 PM:
We do go to council meetings and we do "scream our heads off" but it does no good. The council is not interested in public opinion and will not listen to citizens nor accept any input. In fact sneaking around public input is the usual tactic. We knew there was an ulterior motive for Purcell to go for Land Use powers. Houston City council and the mayor are disgusting. How do you look in the mirror in the morning????? "
jp wrote on Jun 28, 2009 7:18 PM:
2020 wrote on Jun 28, 2009 1:38 PM:
Surely the same 'mayor' that just filed suit for improper public notice would not be hiding something from the public?
Would he? "
Lisa wrote on Jun 28, 2009 12:51 PM:
Purcell won't be happy until Houston has a combination prison / Wal-Mart / coal-pellet-fired power plant, with the rest leveled and paved for parking (with a fenced trail through it for Nancy).
Go back to school and learn about spelling, grammar, and government Roger. "
just a thought wrote on Jun 28, 2009 12:06 PM:
Jill ember wrote on Jun 28, 2009 11:28 AM:
seen it before wrote on Jun 28, 2009 11:25 AM:
3 generations wrote on Jun 28, 2009 9:28 AM:
Concerned wrote on Jun 28, 2009 8:32 AM:
Wondering wrote on Jun 28, 2009 8:29 AM:
You should know Sandy wrote on Jun 28, 2009 8:20 AM:
Wait there is more, closing down a legal road right away by your house to land lock the land behind your newly purchased 40 acres, again as Mayor you didn’t let the council in on this little tidbit. Can we say conflict of interest, you had a direct gain from this road closer and yet you signed off as Mayor. "