Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bannock County commissioners uphold denial of conditional use permit for gravel operation
Summary
The Bannock County Board of Commissioners upheld a Planning and Development Council denial of a conditional use permit for a gravel-processing operation in an on-the-record appeal. Commissioners said the council had not made affirmative findings on all five approval criteria; the applicant may reapply or pursue further appeals.
The Bannock County Board of Commissioners on an on-the-record appeal review upheld the Planning and Development Council’s Jan. 16 denial of a conditional use permit for a gravel-processing operation (referred to in the record as the “scrabble pit”). The hearing was not a public-comment hearing, and commissioners reviewed the record, transcripts and submitted materials before voting to uphold the council’s decision.
Assistant Planning Director Tristan Borkwin told commissioners the council did not make affirmative findings for all five criteria required to approve the conditional use permit and that the applicant’s appeal argues criteria A through D could be found in the affirmative. Borkwin said the board had the application, the verbatim transcript of the council hearing and materials submitted at that meeting for review.
Commissioners said they had read the record. One commissioner said, “I did read through the transcript. I felt due diligence was done. I have no reason to, personally or as a commissioner to go against the findings that your commission came up with.” Another commissioner concurred and confirmed the session was a procedural step in the appeals process.
A commissioner moved to uphold the denial, saying, “I would go ahead and make the motion that we uphold the denial of this particular application.” There was no public testimony at the appeal hearing; the meeting proceeded on the written record. The motion carried on a voice vote. The board noted the applicant may return to Planning and Development or pursue further appeal steps if they choose to continue the process.
The record in this matter consists of the Planning and Development Council packet and the verbatim transcript from the council’s Jan. 16 meeting, plus any materials submitted at that hearing. The commissioners did not state additional conditions or direct staff to take further action beyond recording their decision to uphold the council’s denial.
