P&Z debates asphalt plants, gravel pits

▶️ Listen to this article now.

SANDPOINT – At the end of a 4-hour long meeting, only six citizens remained to hear the Planning and Zoning commissioners postpone a vote on the permit request to allow a controversial asphalt plant to be built in Sandpoint Sand & Gravel’s Sagle gravel pit.

Commissioners deliberated eventually agreeing that even if the zoning changed, the addition of an asphalt plant would not comply with zoning laws.

Sandpoint Sand & Gravel would like to relocate an asphalt batch plant to a portion of the 136-acre gravel pit located along Highway 95. The plant's relocation was challenged by a lawsuit filed by Tom and Marge Murphy on Dec. 29, 2020. The Murphys, who live right next to the gravel pit, claim Sandpoint Sand & Gravel has expanded the gravel pit’s original boundaries into a 15-foot buffer zone around their property. The couple also claimed Sandpoint Sand & Gravel has excavated gravel from their property. Sandpoint Sand & Gravel filed a counter complaint via third-party in January this year, stating that the fence line separating the properties has always been considered a common boundary.

However in Thursday’s meeting, planning commissioners focused on what would be acceptable zoning for the conceptual asphalt plant. Teetering between resource based and industrial use zoning for the site.

Commissioner Dave Frankenbach was not certain if the proposed asphalt plant fell solidly into either category. He questioned whether that, regardless of the zoning, if special considerations would need to be made for the asphalt plant.

Building off Frankenbach's point, commissioner Suzanne Glasoe questioned whether an asphalt plant and a gravel pit were the same thing.

“If you move next to an airport, you can’t complain about the airplanes," she said, "a gravel pit is much different from an asphalt plant.”

The discussion stemmed from a request for the commission to approve a request for a conditional use permit for the site. While commissioners delayed a vote on the overall proposal Thursday, the board did remove the final clause from the proposed permit. Which allowed for an asphalt plant to be located in a gravel pit, because it would be considered discrete and separate from the overall use of the gravel pit.

All commissioners felt that an asphalt plant could not be considered discrete. They also discussed if an asphalt plant needs to be on location with the gravel mine, or if the gravel can be processed into asphalt elsewhere.