McHenry gravel pit annexation vote delayed, Super Aggregates owner wants more time

A McHenry City Council vote on whether to annex 110 acres at Chapel Hill Road and Route 120 for a gravel mining operation has been delayed until at least July 17 after the petitioner asked for more time.

The request was on the agenda at Monday’s city council meeting, but new council members sworn in on May 1 have not seen his presentation before, Super Aggregates owner Jack Pease said.

He’s also recently began meeting with neighbors in the “last two – four days, trying to address the concerns and making owners OK” with the project, Pease said.

About 100 residents who live near the proposed gravel mine attended Monday’s board meeting to voice their objections to the project.

Pease is seeking annexation of the mine into McHenry, as well as zoning changes, a conditional use permit for mining, processing, asphalt and concrete recycling, outdoor storage and construction of a lake. Other zoning variations include reducing a berm to 6 to 8 feet in height rather than the 10 feet required by code; for setbacks of 30 to 50 feet instead of the 100 feet required; and hours of operations exemptions allowing the mine to operate “to meet contractural obligations from time to time.”

The mine, as proposed by Pease, would extract materials below the shallow aquifer’s groundwater line using hydraulic floats, according to the city staff’s report to the council. “Hydraulic dredging does have the advantage of producing less noice and dust than dry earth extraction activities,” according to the report.

Pease said it is the company’s goal to mine the area within 20 years, then redevelop the mine as a housing development with the lake as a central feature.

Mike Alva, a resident of the unincorporated Val-Mar County Estates adjacent to the proposed mine, spoke against the plan. Another gravel pit, operated by Thelan Materials but outside McHenry, also operates adjacent to the Super Aggregates site.

“He can tell you 20 years” to mine gravel and develop the site, Alva said of Pease’s proposal. “If the economy goes bad, how are you going to sell your gravel?” Alva asked.

If the McHenry City Council approves the annexation and conditional use permits as requested, he would have mining operations 50 yards from his back yard, Alva said.

“I want people to work, we need people to work and build roads. But we have to live with another gravel pit” if it is allowed, Alva said.

Pease said he came to McHenry with the proposal, rather than to McHenry County, so the city would get the royalties and other taxing income off of the mine and future development.

Ward 1 Alderman Victor Santi said the proposed location may not be the right location for a gravel pit, but that he would rather see the city control its development rather than the county.

Gravel “is a needed product in our environment today,” adding, however, that the issue may be control. “Does the city want to control this piece of property or have it fall into the hands of the county?” Santi asked.

Because the planning and zoning commission previously denied the proposal, if the City Council were to approve it at a later meeting, a super-majority vote of the board – five of the seven board members – would be needed to annex the property. The remaining items, including conditional use permit and zoning variations, would require only a simple majority.