Johnson County Board of Zoning Appeals approves Irving Materials site-plan modification for Greenwood gravel operation
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up FreeSummary
The Johnson County Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 23 approved a modification to Irving Materials’ previously granted use variance to expand mineral excavation onto a triangular parcel south of 6695 South Moose Valley Road in White River Township.
The Johnson County Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 23 approved a modification to Irving Materials’ previously granted use variance that expands the company’s sand-and-gravel excavation area on land south of 6695 South Moose Valley Road in White River Township.
Board members voted unanimously to approve petition V-11-25, which staff described as a modification to the site plan and plan of operation for a mineral excavation use variance originally approved in 2020. The board’s recorded vote was five in favor, none opposed.
The modification adds roughly 13 acres to the parcel the company may mine; the overall property totals about 87 acres, staff told the board. The area to be added was previously marked in the 2020 site plan as a non-mining triangle near the I‑69 right-of-way. The parcel adjoins existing mining operations operated by Martin Marietta and other extraction zones approved in 2004 (SP‑4‑04), staff said.
Petitioner Brian Duncan, representing Irving Materials, described the change as a response to development patterns after I‑69 was built and said the new area contains “great sand and gravel” the company intends to remove. “It still has great sand and gravel below it,” Duncan said, adding the company expects the worked-out area to become a lake when mining is finished.
Residents who live south of the subject property pressed the board on groundwater and truck impacts. Vanita Van, who said she has lived on Old State Road 37 for decades, testified that nearby lakes and wells have declined in recent years and asked how additional mining would affect her 25‑foot well. “My water is pristine, and that’s what I’m concerned about,” Van said.
Cathy Peacock, who said her neighborhood is entirely on well water, said she worried that mining and continued conversion of farmland to industrial uses could force residents onto municipal water and sewer systems they cannot afford. Peacock also criticized the use of public roads by heavy truck traffic, calling the route a “taxpayer funded road for the dump trucks.”
A company representative, Ramon Strader, answered resident questions about water use and monitoring. Strader said Irving Materials does not withdraw groundwater for processing but circulates water in its systems and returns it to on-site ponds. “We don’t ever withdraw water from this area,” he said, and added the company conducts annual testing of monitoring wells for parameters such as SOCs, VOCs and IOC standards and shares results with local water providers.
Staff and the petitioner described truck routing as exiting the site onto Smith Valley Road and then using 1600 to access I‑69; petitioner testimony said on-site scales are used and trucks generally do not use Old State Road 37 unless required by specific projects. The petitioner estimated the life of the expanded reserve at roughly 25 years, depending on demand and the economy.
Staff told the board the current request was not for a new use variance but for a modification of the prior approved plan of operation tied to the 2020 use variance (referenced in staff materials as B‑21‑20). Staff also noted that adjoining tracts were authorized for mineral extraction by special exception (SP‑4‑04, 02/2004). The board discussed the five statutory variance findings it must consider before voting.
Motion and vote: a board member moved to approve V‑11‑25, a second was recorded (Mister Taylor), and the motion passed with all members voting yes (Hoffman yes, Canary yes, Kaylor yes, Meyer yes; recorded tally: 5 yes). The board’s action was described in the meeting as approval of the modification to the plan of operation; no additional conditions, or permit limits beyond the modified site plan were recorded in the minutes.
The board had no additional old or new business and adjourned after the vote.
(For source material: staff presentation and petitioner statements at the Sept. 23, 2025 Johnson County Board of Zoning Appeals meeting; public comments from nearby residents.)
