Board splits decision on two gravel pits

The Daily Inter Lake

One new West Valley gravel pit was approved and another denied Tuesday night during an eight-hour Flathead County Board of Adjustment meeting.

The two projects are about a mile apart, near the intersection of Church Drive and Farm to Market Road, in an area where other major gravel operations have been approved in recent years.

The board voted 4-1 to deny Joe Beasley's conditional-use permit request for a 200-acre gravel pit on 271 acres at 3248 Farm to Market, just south of Church Drive. They had several concerns with the project, including traffic safety, potential water-quality impacts and neighborhood impacts.

However, Paul Tutvedt's conditional-use permit for a 153-acre pit on West Valley Drive, just east of Farm to Market, was unanimously approved.

The public hearing on Beasley's proposal took almost five hours. That was followed by a three-hour hearing on Tutvedt's project. About 70 people attended the meeting, which adjourned at 2 a.m.

The board's decisions were endorsed by the Flathead County Planning Office, which opposed Beasley's permit and supported Tutvedt's.

Kalispell attorney Tom Esch, representing Beasley, said the Planning Office's diametrically opposed recommendations on two similar projects represented a major disservice to the board.

"Our position is that there's no factual or scientific basis for the different recommendations," Esch said.

He encouraged the board to approve Beasley's permit with a long list of conditions that would address issues such as dust abatement, noise, hours of operation and permitted activities.

Although the county commissioners have determined that the West Valley Zoning District is residential in nature, Esch said that was a legal fiction. He handed out photographs indicating that the Beasley property was "still one of the most rural areas in the valley," and said the impacts from the pit on surrounding landowners would be minimal.

Hydrogeologist Marc Spratt also referenced a number of studies from other states that concluded gravel extraction doesn't pollute the underlying groundwater.

"It doesn't add anything to the [groundwater] system," Spratt said. "We aren't going to be pumping water out of the pit, so it won't change the direction or rate of the groundwater flow. The mere action of extracting gravel won't change the mobility of nitrates in the system."

The Beasley and Tutvedt gravel pits are in the Lost Creek Fan, an alluvial deposit formed by sediments spilling out of the Salish Mountains onto the valley floor.

During the past decade, several shallow wells within the fan have tested dangerously high for nitrates. According to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, the contamination forms the largest nitrate plume in the state.

Despite testing several wells, the agency hasn't officially determined the source of the pollution. Nevertheless, several area residents said they were concerned that Beasley's pit would exacerbate the problem - particularly because he proposed digging down below the shallow aquifer.

"The nitrates are there because a mistake happened [in the past]," said Tammy Graham. "Any you know what? Mistakes will continue to happen. Good intentions go awry, and mistakes happen."

Kalispell attorney Roger Sullivan, representing Flathead Citizens for Quality Growth, cited written testimony from the Flathead Lake Biological Station suggesting that Beasley's pit could pose a threat to water quality.

"When you remove the geological structure [soil and gravel] that acts as a filter - especially in a vulnerable area like this - then you're removing the element that prevents further pollution," Sullivan maintained.

Board member Tony Sagami said water quality and traffic safety were his primary concerns, and he thought Spratt had adequately addressed the water quality issue.

"So the key issue is safety. Can we mitigate that or not?" he asked.

Board member Mark Hash said he was concerned about both issues.

"We're here to protect the public health and safety, and people are telling us Farm to Market Road isn't safe now," he said. "Maybe this is just a place where a gravel pit shouldn't be. There comes a point when the infrastructure just can't handle anything more."

After Sagami asked what the difference was between the Beasley and Tutvedt proposals, the Planning Office staff noted that Tutvedt wasn't digging down below the water table.

He also plans to deliver most of his gravel to the LHC facility on Stillwater Road for processing into asphalt and concrete - meaning the trucks would be traveling primarily along back roads - and he or other members of the Tutvedt family own much of the surrounding property, so the staff thought there would be fewer impacts on immediate neighbors.

During his presentation to the board, Beasley indicated that "Plan B" might be developing a major subdivision on his property.

Board member Scott Hollinger said that a subdivision means individual septic systems and more traffic than gravel pit would generate. However, several neighbors said they preferred a residential project to an industrial operation.

In other action Tuesday, the board unanimously approved a conditional-use permit for Dancing Fox LLC, which wants to build an 8-unit multi-family dwelling on 0.63 acres at 655 Commerce Street in Bigfork.

Reporter Bill Spence may be reached at 758-4459 or by e-mail at bspence@dailyinterlake.com