Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mining topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and builders warn of dust, road damage and property impacts from proposed gravel pit near Box Elder
Summary
Commissioners spent the latter half of the meeting hearing detailed commissioner reports and resident testimony about a proposed gravel‑mining operation adjacent to Box Elder. Speakers raised concerns about dust, drainage, road degradation, school‑traffic conflicts and potential reductions in property values; the county mining permit was reported to be scheduled for June 10.
Commissioners used the commission member input portion of the May 13 meeting to discuss a nearby proposal to stockpile gravel and operate a short‑term mining site just outside Box Elder’s corporate limits. Commissioner Broomfield reported attending a Rapid City planning meeting where the matter drew heavy public opposition and was tabled so the stockpiling and mining requests could be considered together. “There was about 35, 40 people showed up in opposition,” Broomfield said, and commissioners warned the issue will likely return to local hearings.
A resident and builder who identified himself in the record as Mr. Hedrick described living within about 300 feet of the proposed site and urged commissioners to expect contacts from concerned neighbors. He summarized likely impacts: “Gravel mining does involve explosives as well. So you’re going to have… silt and dust issues…noise issues, and then you’re going to have road destruction.” Hedrick said the county mining permit hearing is planned for June 10 and that the stockpiling/contractor storage request and county mining permit are being pursued separately but could proceed in tandem.
Commissioners and other participants raised several concrete concerns. One commissioner cited an estimate that home values in the affected zone could fall by about 20 percent, and speakers questioned whether reclamation bonds will be adequate; Hedrick said he had been told that “over 80% of short term excavation sites...go in, they destroy the property, get what they need, and then the company disappears or files bankruptcy.” There was discussion about whether blasting would be used; some attendees said blasting was unlikely given the glacial gravel deposits, while others warned the geology and contractor choice determine the method used.
Speakers also raised traffic and safety issues for local roads and school bus routes, noting narrow local roads with deep ditches and no shoulders are not designed for sustained heavy‑truck traffic. Commissioners said the proposing contractor was not named in notices the commission had seen, making it difficult to evaluate reclamation capability. Several participants urged residents and commissioners to monitor the county process and prepare for a long, potentially contentious review.
The commission did not take formal action on the mining matter at the May 13 meeting; commissioners characterized the item as a developing issue likely to return when county permits or related applications come before local bodies.
