My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0007300
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
R
>
RIVER
>
26292
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
QX-89-0002
>
SU0007300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2020 3:08:38 PM
Creation date
9/9/2019 9:06:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0007300
PE
2656
FACILITY_NAME
QX-89-0002
STREET_NUMBER
26292
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
RIVER
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
ESCALON
APN
24722019
ENTERED_DATE
7/29/2008 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
26292 E RIVER RD
RECEIVED_DATE
7/28/2008 12:00:00 AM
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\R\RIVER\26292\QX-890002\SU0007300\CORRESPOND.PDF
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
629
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
THOMAS H. TE"STRA <br /> ATTORNEY AT LAW <br /> A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION <br /> tterpstra@thtlaw.com 578 N.WILMA AVENUE 209599.5003 <br /> SUITE A F209.599.5008 <br /> RIPON,CA 95366 <br /> October 14,2010 <br /> Chandler Martin, Deputy Director <br /> San Joaquin County Community Development Department <br /> 1810 East Hazelton Avenue <br /> Stockton, California 95205 <br /> Re: Revision of Approved Actions/OX-89-0002/Munn& Perkins <br /> Dear Mr. Martin: <br /> As you know,my office represents a number of residents near the proposed Munn and <br /> Perkins plant on River Road. It is my understanding that Munn and Perkins' proposed Revision <br /> of Approved Actions application, along with a Negative Declaration, will be reviewed by the <br /> �. Planning Commission in a public hearing scheduled for Thursday night, October 21, 2010. <br /> My clients continue to have concerns about the proposed project, and they, along with <br /> many of their neighbors,will be present Thursday night to speak in opposition to this project. I <br /> have enclosed numerous letters from neighbors who are concerned about this dramatic expansion <br /> of the existing Munn and Perkins operation. <br /> First, I want to make it clear that the neighbors consider the proposed night time <br /> operations to be not merely an extension of hours,but rather, a significant expansion of the <br /> proposed use. With no limit on overall permitted gross tonnage from this facility, it is not as if <br /> the same amount of material will be processed and exported from the site,only at different <br /> hours; rather,the allowance of night time operations opens up an entirely new(and rapidly <br /> expanding)market to Munn and Perkins. This expansion into a new market deserves close <br /> scrutiny,not only as to noise impacts,but also in the areas of traffic and air quality. <br /> In terms of traffic, let us assume that the environmental"baseline" is represented by the <br /> existing maximum traffic which can be generated during existing approved operating hours. <br /> This is, incidentally, acknowledged in Munn and Perkins' March 2, 1999 letter to the <br /> undersigned,in which Project Coordinator Carol Vierra stated: "The plant design limits <br /> operations and allow a maximum hourly production. Once capacity is met,we simply <br /> cannot produce anymore." Ms. Vierra was correct on that point. But if the County now allows <br /> that same maximum hourly production to occur during both daytime and nighttime hours,the <br /> cumulative traffic is increased dramatically. This increase in traffic, which may or may not be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.