by James Coulter
Despite residents raising concerns about potential pollution, noise, and traffic issues, county commissioners approved an appeal to a proposed sand mine near Lake Wales.
At their recent meeting on Tues. Mar. 17, the Polk County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) voted 4-1 to approve an appeal to the Planning Commission’s decision regarding a 656-acre sand mine. Commissioner Michael Scott voted against the appeal.
Originally, the Polk County Planning Commission denied a request for the proposed mine through a 6-1 vote at their meeting on Wed. Dec. 3, 2025. However, the property owner, PH Citrus, LLC., had since appealed the decision and revised the plan, reducing the proposed mine’s size from 850 acres to 650 acres and including a six-foot-high berm to mitigate any potential noise and pollution.
Located north and south of State Road 60, the proposed mine has proven controversial due to its proximity to Saddlebag Lake Resort, with the mine adjacent to the resort’s eastern boundary. Of the 656 acres, 502 acres will be used for wet mining, with no plans for a borrow pit, chemical processing, or a batch or block plant. At maximum capacity, approximately 268 trucks are expected to frequent the facility per day.
Concerns have been raised about silicosis, an irreversible lung condition caused by the inhalation of silica dust often produced through similar mining activity. Dr. Robert Demot, one of the team experts with Peterson & Myers PA representing the applicant and landowner, has stated that “there is no basis to expect silicosis or similar conditions in the surrounding communities resulting from the proposed sand mine.”
However, Kathy Pratt, a retired engineer representing the organized opposition, argued that the mine’s application record did not include technical studies required to evaluate mining impact on air quality, noise, lighting, groundwater, and traffic safety.
Furthermore, while the agreement may have taken concerns from Saddlebag Lake Resort into account, these same concerns were still expressed by residents in surrounding communities that could be potentially impacted by mining operations.
“That agreement only applies to Saddleback Lake and not the broader impact of surrounding communities… who remain directly affected by the proposed mine,” Pratt read aloud from a letter from the Saddlebag Homeowners’ Association.
Pratt warned that the mine could become a nuisance and safety risk, citing increased nighttime noise and lighting, heavier traffic on US Highway 60 and Mammoth Road, and significant water loss from pit-lake evaporation. She estimated that 500 acres of exposed water could evaporate roughly 690 million gallons each year.
“When the technical evidence needed to prove compatibility is missing, the only responsible decision is denial,” she told commissioners. “For that reason, we respectfully request that you deny this application.”
Several dozen residents spoke during public comments to voice their opposition to the proposed sand mine.
Citrus farmer Matthew Machata said his groves could suffer if the aquifer drops, noting that evaporation alone could drain two to three million gallons of water per day.
Danielle Paul, a 20-year Florida resident, argued the mine would worsen already dangerous traffic conditions, recalling five fatal crashes in the area, including one she narrowly avoided.
Charles Perkins claimed the mine would cause property values to “tank,” saying some homeowners had already sold and left due to what he described as an “unethical push by a mining company.”
Jennifer Castro, a local farmer, claimed the proposed mine would jeopardize the quality of life for her and other residents if approved on behalf of “rich people” and “oligarchs.”
“This situation should not be my situation because I did not move here for this,” she said. “I do not want to die here because of money. I don’t vote for this. I do not accept this proposal. We need people on our side. We are the people who buy the land. We need to be protected.”
Bart Allen of Peterson & Myers PA, arguing in defense of the applicant, claimed that the necessary documents, reports, and analyses of the conditions that apply to non-phosphate mining had been submitted, making the proposed mine compliant with county code.
“You have everything to indicate that this project meets your code,” he said.
Several commissioners voiced their decision to approve the appeal.
Commissioner Becky Troutman visited a similar operation, which helped clear some concerns.
“That site visit alone answered a lot of common-sense concerns that I heard raised today that, when you investigate and look at it as what it is, you can see it’s not a dust storm sitting there waiting to happen,” she said.
Commissioner Rick Wilson, while sympathetic to the concerns of nearby residents, said the development was inevitable as the area had historically been used for sand mining.
“I know you all live in a great place, and I know you all love it, but you moved beside a sand mine back in the day,” he said.
Commissioner Bill Braswell said the site seemed compatible, especially being in an area with a mining history.
“We are talking about a sand mine next to a sand mine next to a 200-acre field. So, I will be supporting it,” he said.
Commissioner Martha Santiago noted that while many accidents have recently occurred along State Road 60, none of them were caused by sand mining trucks.
“We are going to continue to have accidents along Highway 60. I claim that the problem is drivers not being careful, especially the last one. The drivers drive along 60 too carelessly, and that is a fact of life,” she said.
Commissioner Scott was the only commissioner to vote against the appeal. He argued that traffic safety was a valid concern and that the site plan could be better modified to mitigate potential adverse effects.
“As it is proposed right now, this site plan would certainly lend itself to have adverse impacts on the travel ways, the citizens around the area, and those residential neighborhoods,” he said.
“I think there are better approaches to what the site plan could look like. I would like to see it as a different site plan and not as it is currently proposed.”
