EMMETT, Idaho — Emmett neighbors packed into the Gem County Annex Monday night for an appeal hearing challenging the county's approval of "Merrill's Pit," a controversial 393-acre gravel pit project by Granite Excavation.
The Southwest Gem County Association, representing Emmett neighbors near Salesyard and Star Lane, is appealing Gem County's approval of the project, arguing the timeline left too little time to respond and that new evidence from Granite was filed just four days before the August hearing, where it was approved.
Watch to learn more about the appeal regarding "Merrill's Pit" approval.
Landon Brown from Holly Troxel law firm represented the Southwest Gem Community Association at the hearing.
"These are folks who, over the past few months, have lost sleep over this proposed gravel pit. They've stressed about it. They've worried about it. They're concerned about their health. They're concerned about their property values. They're concerned about their future here in Gem County," Brown said.
Brown emphasized overwhelming community opposition to the project.
"About 98 to 90% of the community who submitted written comments or provided oral testimony or appeared at the public hearing were opposed to this gravel pit. This is overwhelming opposition, and we are seeing this overwhelming opposition because people do not want to live by gravel pits anymore," Brown said.
Brown argued that Granite has not met six of the nine required findings under Gem County Code to obtain a special use permit, focusing heavily on health risks from silica dust exposure.
"This study concluded that silica dust exposure can lead to silicosis, which is an irreversible lung disease. It can also lead to pulmonary disease and lung cancer. It can also lead to tuberculosis and autoimmune disease," Brown said.
Brown criticized dust mitigation measures as inadequate.
"The problem with watering is in the summertime, water evaporates too quickly in the heat to have any meaningful impact," Brown said.
He showed photos of dust plumes from existing gravel pits in Gem County as evidence that current mitigation doesn't work.
Brown argued that Granite's operation would create 192 movements on Star Lane, representing a 72% increase in heavy truck traffic. He contended that reconstructing Star Lane to county standards would require eminent domain.
"So reconstructing Star Lane to the current standards will require eminent domain or condemnation of private property," Brown said.
Brown also criticized the commission for failing to require compliance with the traffic impact study, which recommends a westbound left turn lane at Star Lane and Highway 52.
Regarding screening, Brown argued berms would not effectively block views from elevated South Slope Road homes.
"Due to this elevation difference, a berm will not actually screen the site from these nearby residences," Brown said.
Brown addressed property value impacts, noting residents expressed concerns about 20 to 30% decreases.
"Even if Granite operated the gravel pit in strict compliance with all the conditions of approval, my client's properties will still decrease in value. That's because it's the mere existence of the gravel pit that causes a decrease in their property value when there's no screening," Brown said.
Brown raised due process violations regarding a 159-page water impact evaluation submitted just four days before the hearing.
"Due process requires that the public have a meaningful opportunity to comment on the evidence in the record. They were not given an opportunity to provide any written comments on this report," Brown said.
Brown heavily criticized the HDR water evaluation as containing unreliable information. He noted the evaluation used data from an existing pit nearly two miles away, with the Premier pit and airport in between.
"They're not adjacent to each other. In fact, the premier pit is in between them. The airport is in between them. They're nearly two miles apart. There's no evidence suggesting that data from the existing pit will correlate exactly with what's going to happen at the proposed pit. It's just speculation," Brown said.
Brown highlighted that the evaluation relied on severely outdated information.
"The data that's in the report is outdated. This is a Geotech report that's attached to Appendix A in the HDR evaluation that was used as part of the evaluation. It's dated January 9, 2008. That is extremely outdated information," Brown said.
Brown also revealed that one monitoring well was incorrectly located in the evaluation.
"One of the monitoring wells using the evaluation is in the wrong location," Brown said, noting the well is actually located next to Highway 16, miles away from both pits.
"This is unreliable data. So this HDR report relies on data from 2008, and it relies on data from a monitoring well that's in the wrong location. This isn't reliable data that should be used to determine whether or not groundwater levels will be impacted by the proposed pit," Brown said.
Brown contrasted the technical report with real-world experiences from residents living near existing gravel pits.
"Again, these are real experiences and real evidence of the impact that gravel pits have on groundwater and on domestic wells, and these are testimony and evidence submitted by the people of Gem County who are living next to these sites," Brown said.
Josh Lenard, representing Granite Excavation, defended the project's compliance and argued the appeal represents only 20 individuals from a 5,000-acre area.
"The county's own road and bridge director confirmed that the existing right of way is sufficient… No eminent domain is necessary," Lenard said.
Lenard emphasized the project would relocate existing truck routes rather than add new traffic.
"There is no net increase in the number of trucks or the number of mineral extraction operations in Gem County. The Merrill Pit will simply be relocating truck trips from the existing Sawyer pit operation," Lenard said.
Josh Davis, Granite Excavation owner, filed his own narrow appeal requesting changes to two conditions while accepting the overall approval.
"Granite very much appreciates the planning and zoning's unanimous approval of our SUP application. Our appeal is very narrow. We fully accept the SUP approval, and we're only requesting two changes," Davis said.
Davis proposed a phased approach to Star Lane reconstruction, arguing that immediate reconstruction would be wasteful.
"Granite supports reconstructing Star Lane, but we propose a phased approach… building at the right time with material from the proposed pit delivers a stronger, longer-lasting roadway, reduces unnecessary hauling, and avoids public road impacts," Davis said.
Davis explained that using aggregates from the proposed pit would avoid hauling 600 truckloads from their Sawyer pit via Airport Road.
"This would cause undue wear and tear on Airport Road and additional disruption to the community," Davis said.
Davis also requested removal of a six-foot safety fencing requirement, arguing existing safety measures, including perimeter fencing, gates, signs, berms, and setbacks are sufficient.
When commissioners questioned Star Lane's current capacity, county road and bridge director Mr. Capps noted mixed conditions.
"Part of the Star Lane on the south side of Salesyard is in really good condition. The north side from Highway 52 to Salesyard is, is in the, in deteriorated," Capps said.
Davis compared Star Lane's width to Mill Road, which Granite currently uses.
"We did an analysis of the existing widths of Star Lane in comparison to the existing widths of Mill Road, which is our, our typical ingress and egress to Highway 52, and they're very comparable," Davis said.
County commissioners are expected to deliberate on the project on Dec. 22 at 2:30 p.m. at the Gem County Annex.
