Latest Headlines
- Application Denied For Borrow Pit On Highway 95A In Molino
- Man Arrested On Multiple Charges After Manhunt In Cottage Hill
- Highway 4 Bridge Opening Delayed By Wrong Paint
- Tom Harrell Wins Escambia County School Board District 5 Seat
- Jay High Teacher Beats Incumbent Santa Rosa County Commissioner Calkins
- Steve Stroberger Wins District 1 Commission Seat, Ousting Jeff Bergosh
- Gaetz Easily Beats McCarthy-Backed Challenger Dimmock
- Ashlee Hofberger Wins Republican Primary For District 4 Escambia Commission
- Complete Escambia County Election Results
- Wahoos Walked Off by Smokies in 2-1 Defeat
Application Denied For Borrow Pit On Highway 95A In Molino
August 22, 2024
The Escambia County Board of Adjustment (BOA) has denied a conditional use change application for a borrow pit in Molino.
According to Escambia County, a borrow pit is where material like gravel, soil, clay or sand is excavated for use at another location. Borrow pits can be enclosed or open, and both types require a permit in Escambia County.
The applicant, Justin Patterson or Ironhorse Cattle, Co., proposed a 44-acre borrow pit on 52.88 acres zoned AG (agriculture use) at 5595 Highway 95A, west of Highway 95A and just south of Cedartown Road. Escambia County Land Development Code (LDC) requires conditional approval use approval for any borrow pit or reclamation activity with 1,000 feet from any residential use or zoning.
In a meeting lasting over five hours Wednesday, the BOA heard testimony from numerous residents, most expressing concerns about truck traffic, dust, perceived environmental issues, and noise that would impact the surround area. Several others spoke in support of allowing the applicant to use the property as proposed.
BOA staff recommended the approval of the conditional use to allow the pit.
Wednesday, the BOA votes 3-1 to deny the application. A similar conditional use change request for the property was denied by the Board in April 2022.
Specifically, the Board disagreed with the staff recommendation, effectively finding that:
- General compatibility. The proposed use cannot be conducted and operated in a manner that is compatible with adjacent properties and other properties in the immediate area.
- Nuisances and hazards. The scale, intensity, and operation of the use will generate unreasonable noise, glare, dust, smoke, odor, vibration, electrical interference, or other nuisances or hazards for adjoining properties and other
- properties in the immediate area
- Screening and buffering. Where not otherwise required by the Land Development Code (LDC,) screening and buffering will not be provided if appropriate to the proposed use and site.
- Use requirements. The proposed use does not comply with any additional conditional use requirements of the applicable zoning district, use, or other provisions of the LDC.
Board member Michael Godwin noted that as many as a dozen residences are within 1,000 feet of the proposed borrow pit property.
The Application And Proposal
“The proposed use can be conducted and operated in a manner that is compatible with adjacent and surrounding properties. The subject property is largely surrounded by undeveloped property,” the application stated, noting that there is one residential structure to the south of the proposed pit site, which will become a lake overlooked by a single-family residence when after excavation is complete. Operation is planned for 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday to Saturday, as allowed by the LDC. A 25-foot landscape buffer was proposed around the fenced-in pit.
Single access to the pit property was proposed for a driveway off Highway 95A across from Josh Lane.
The developer’s application said noise would be limited to the daylight hours and with pit’s sidewalls acting as a sound barrier, and a dust suppression system would have been used to prevent airborne materials.
“The use will not generate unreasonable noise, glare, dust, smoke, odor, vibration or other nuisances or hazards,” the application stated. “The excavation activity is temporary.”
According to the Northwest Florida Water Management District, there are no permitted potable water wells with 500 feet of the property; however, the permitting program did not exist until the late 1970s, and records are incomplete before the late 1980s.
A neighbor previously objected to the proposed use based on a private irrigation well in the vicinity of the project. An attorney for the applicant asserted that protections do not exist around any private or non-potable (drinking) water well.
Escambia County Development Review staff have recommended approval of the conditional use of the property.
“Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use as submitted with the enhanced buffering as detailed on the submitted site plan. DRC site plan approval and BCC approval of the reclamation plan are required,” was the staff findings as submitted.
Photos for NorthEscambia.com, NorthEscambia.com graphics, click to enlarge.
Comments
9 Responses to “Application Denied For Borrow Pit On Highway 95A In Molino”
This is good news for our community. You can’t undo a borrow pit…it would be a forever eyesore.
Think about the other communities in Pensacola that have these old pits near them…Marcus Pointe, Wedgewood, I’m pretty sure they would not recommend them.
Confirmed at the meeting
Reason land was underdeveloped on and to the west of his property, ALL WETLANDS…
His plan said TEMPERARY, determed it would take 100,000 dumptruck loads over 20 YEARS
@ JASON
GREAT WIN FOR 95A TRAFFIC
This guy need to go put a house and pond on the property left to him by his grandfather off 99… our community does not need a borrow pit that takes 20 years to turn into a lake, draining and contaminating our natural springs along the way.
It would certainly appear that the application was misleading at best
“Board member Michael Godwin noted that as many as a dozen residences are within 1,000 feet of the proposed borrow pit property.”
Vs
“The subject property is largely surrounded by undeveloped property,” the application stated”
great news!!!
Amen!
This is GOOD NEWS!
IMHO, this is a HUGE win for those neighbors bordering the proposed site.
Just my opinion but I’d rather have a dirt pit next door than a subdivision.