Should town of Milton approve gravel pit?
No doubt, B.R. Amon & Sons of Elkhorn has agreed to plenty of limits on a proposed gravel pit off Klug Road in Milton Township. It has done so to appease residents, including officials from Camp Waconda, a youth summer camp just up the quiet rural road.
For example, Amon says it will build an access road directly to County N to the north and only put truck traffic on Klug to build that road, not to haul gravel. It would limit speeds on the access road to reduce dust. It has dropped plans to wash gravel and mix concrete. Without those, it won’t need to dig wells that might drain available groundwater. It agreed to limit operations from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. weekdays. It wouldn’t fill adjacent marsh and would protect those areas with silt fences or dirt berms. It would bond a reclamation plan to replace topsoil and restore the land to agricultural use.
Nonetheless, neighboring opponents have organized and gotten 300 signatures on a petition. They vow a legal fight.
Are neighbors waging a lost war given the many conditions Amon would follow, or do they still have legitimate concerns?
This will be the subject of The Gazette’s editorial Wednesday.
Greg Peck can be reached at (608) 755-8278 or gpeck@gazettextra.com. Or follow him on Twitter or Facebook
May 30, 2012 at 10:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
jonkon- you sound like a snake-oil salesman. If property values are going to increase, Amon should have no problem buying the homeowners property that are interested in selling.
May 30, 2012 at 7:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
I think its a NO....I really just dont see the point. That is a quiet little area and my kids go to that camp, have for years...why destroy it for the sake of gravel. Pits are just ugly eye sores, the trucks are noisey and do not pay attention to anyones laws. They run uncovered always and nobody does anything. If these people are going to believe that they will kepp things 'up and up" they might....for a short while then once they are off the radar it will be a business as usual approach. For this alone I would vote NO...go after them...and fight for your rights
May 30, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Will the proposed gravel pit create noise and dust? Probably, but the prevailing wind is away from residences, mitigating the pit as a source. Will denying the permit preserve the neighborhood's peace and tranquility? I am afraid that battle was lost when the state chose to route the highway 26 bypass through their backyards. The hill was zoned C1 because the gradient prevented any practical use for the land. The idea its gravel is needed to "filter" water going into the nearby wetland is preposterous, since rainfall in the area is not limited to the top of the hill. Since the site is a working farm deriving its property tax value from the land use, the gravel pit would actually increase the area's property tax values by converting a wasted hill with trash trees into productive farmland.
May 30, 2012 at 11:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
No jobs, just extraction of natural resources. Welcome to the third world, folks!
May 30, 2012 at 6:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
And some are blaming someone about no jobs in Wisconsin,the blame is not one man's fault.
May 29, 2012 at 9:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
I hope that neighbors are not "waging a lost war" in their own back yards. Their concerns seem clearly genuine and legitimate. I find it hard to believe that the public should be expected to automatically trust that this company will do good later. What force of law will guarantee reparation of lands or water which may be permanently damaged or forever altered? What "bond" will protect against costly future damages? Hasn't this gravelly issue been washed with enough cash yet? Is it time to finally put this pesky controversy to bed, it's getting late.
May 29, 2012 at 9:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
What about the new pit just west of stores lake? Will that become a new lake?
May 29, 2012 at 4:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
I think those are some admirable concessions, but ultimately the residents may feel they are the last line of defense for the nearby conservation zones.
May 29, 2012 at 4:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Since there are 2 gravel pits already in the close vicinity of this one, I don't see the need. Especially considering the location of this one. Doesn't a pit directly east of Storr's Lake have water in it from drilling? Then people wonder why Storr's Lake is so much shallower than it ever used to be.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.