• strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_node_status::operator_form() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::operator_form(&$form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/modules/node/views_handler_filter_node_status.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.

Should county have uniform mining rules?

At last Wednesday’s meeting of the McLeod County Planning Advisory Commission, the question was raised as to why some conditions — such as hours of operation and reclamation timeframes — can vary on gravel mining pits in the same area.
Acoma Township officials noted that conditions for two requested mining permit renewals were less restrictive than those placed on another pit at earlier hearings. The three pits are within a short distance of each other.
The officials contended that it seemed unfair for one pit to have more restrictive conditions than the two neighboring pits. They have a good point — why should one pit have more restrictions than its competitors?
It was explained that conditions can vary widely between mining operations, even within the same area. The earlier permit application drew concerns from a lot of people because of its proximity to a rural residential area. The other two pits, while close by, were more remote from residences.
County Zoning Administrator Larry Gasow did a good job of explaining how conditions can vary from one end of the county to another, as well as within a close proximity. He also explained that the type of operation also can impact the number and variety of conditions placed on a permit.
The county’s zoning ordinance does have a baseline of rules for gravel mining operations, as well as the other issues that require permits. However, the ordinance also allows for the placement of conditions on permits to meet the needs of local conditions. After all, what happens on a piece of property may — or may not — impact the neighboring property owners.
Permit applications are, and should be, considered on a case-by-case basis to allow for adjustments for local conditions.
But the Acoma officials do have a point — perhaps one of the local conditions to be considered should be the proximity to other operations of similar nature. In a close neighborhood, it would be less confusing to residents if there were uniform operating hours, for instance, so that they when they are likely to be faced with increased truck traffic in the neighborhood.
But that proximity of operations to one another should only be one of the local aspects to be considered … it should be weighed with the pros and cons of the other aspects. If other units of government would prefer more local control, they can, of course, enact their own ordinances.
The county planning commission, in our opinion, gives thoughtful and impartial consideration of the items that comes before it. And we expect that it will give thoughtful consideration to the concerns raised as it considers future permit applications.