The Yukon government will not accept an application for a gravel quarry in the area known as the Stevens Quarry, located between the Alaska Highway and Takhini River, says a senior official.

The government issued a decision document on Dec. 29 indicating it accepted the recommendation from the Yukon Environment and Socio-economic Assessment Board that a quarry project be permitted to proceed in the area west of the Mayo Road intersection.

Susan Antpoehler of the government’s lands branch said Tuesday the assessment board process is independent of the government’s regulatory process.

Stevens Quarry, she explained, is under an administrative land reserve. As such, the government will not entertain any quarry applications for the area.

The government is, however, moving forward with its own proposal to develop Stevens Quarry, and a local consultant is currently working on the development of that plan, Antpoehler explained. (See separate story.)

In submissions to the assessment board during the review process, the government insists the project proponent is not eligible to receive a land use permit because the area in question is in conflict with a government land reserve.

“As per the Commercial/Industrial Land Application policy, land applications will not be considered if they overlap with a Yukon Government reserve,” says the government’s submission to the assessment boardon July 20, 2020, eight days after Norcope Enterprises submitted its proposal for a gravel pit.

“Land Management Branch cannot accept and review the included application, and it is not eligible to proceed through a regulatory review process.”

The government reiterated its position in further submissions to the board in early September.

The submissions also indicate it would be unfair at this point to issue a quarry permit for one company over another.

The government’s decision document accepting the assessment board’s recommendation comes after the board’s Nov. 12 recommendation to allow the project.

Norcope filed its proposal for review by the assessment board last July 15.

Stevens Quarry has been identified as one of the largest untouched sources of gravel in the city.

The government, in fact, submitted a proposal in 2012 to the assessment board with the support of the city to divide Stevens Quarry into five different gravel pits over the 119.5 hectares.

While the board rejected the project proposal, it did find that developing and operating just one of the five sites at a time would be acceptable, starting with the 21.5-ha. site known as lot number one. The government chose not to proceed.

Norcope’s proposal is to establish its gravel pit on lot number one, with a life expectancy of approximately 10 years.

The pit would be accessed by a 750-metre road off the Alaska Highway. It’s expected annual extraction would be between 50,000 and 75,000 cubic metres, or approximately 5,000 to 7,500 loads of a dual-axle dump truck.

Just as there was eight years ago, there has been substantial opposition to the new proposal by Norcope.

Lake Laberge MLA Brad Cathers wrote Energy, Mines and Resources Ranj Pillai last Friday, saying his constituents feel betrayed by his department’s handling of the Norcope proposal.

First the government says Norcope will not be allowed to proceed – and then it accepts the assessment board’s recommendation to allow the company to proceed. And now the government is seemingly moving forward with its own quarry development plans, Cathers wrote.

“Would you please explain why you are considering developing the Stevens Quarry area?” he asked Pillai.

Of the 33 submissions to the board during the public comment period, 29 or so were from area residents raising the same concerns around dust and noise.

The Takhini River Valley is a windy place; a wind tunnel, say a number of submissions to the board.

The submissions argue dust would be an issue in the Ibex Valley, the MacPherson and Hidden Valley subdivisions, and for farm land across the river.

One MacPherson resident writes that he already hears backup alarms on equipment working in the gravel pit 2.5 kilometres away on the other side of the highway and that Stevens Quarry would be much closer at 1.5 kilometres away.

The 119.5-ha. area is not only valuable as wildlife habitat, but also as a place where local residents enjoy the natural outdoors and walking the trails, the submissions all agree.

“We are very much opposed to this quarry development,” says one submission.

“This battle has been fought several times in the more than 35 years we have been at this location and every time it has been deemed an inappropriate activity so close to a residential subdivision.”

Area residents have begun a petition opposing the Norcope quarry proposal, with more than 400 adult signatures collected so far from property owners, renters and business owners – 234 going door-to-door, 180 online.

The petition reads in part: “The development of open pit gravel quarries would be in stark contrast to the decades old established land use patterns. If this new supply of gravel is truly required, it must be obtained outside of this key agriculture, eco-tourism and country residential zone.”

Norcope CEO Doug Gonder says in his submission to the assessment board the city needs another gravel source and the Stevens Quarry area is the best location.

It’s at the north end of the city where all the development is occurring in the Whistle Bend subdivision and will continue to occur for years to come, says Gonder’s submission.

He says Norcope has been looking for other suitable gravel sources for 10 years but there are none.

It’s a sad reflection on the government that it has done nothing to ensure a source of gravel was readily available to keep up with supply in Whitehorse and the surrounding area, he says.

Gonder says there’s going to be public resistance to establishing new gravel pits anywhere in the city.

Having to haul gravel from 16 kilometres outside the city limits would drive up the cost for everybody, he points out.

Gonder says in his submission he is confident Norcope’s quarry development proposal would exceed all expectations in addressing the potentially negative impacts.

“We need to look very hard at making this development work, for those that need it the most, but at the same time ensuring those that could be impacted by new development are assured that it would not harm their investment or privacy in any way, and this can be accomplished,” Gonder insists ins his submission.

The only submission from the city to the assessment board noted the area is properly zoned for quarry development.