SU0004576 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C C) August 19,2004 Page 1 of 4 o c' m C To: San Joaquin County From: Loretta Larson/Eugene Larson o O Community Development Department 22342 Henry Road a John Funderburg, Contact Person Escalon, Ca. 95320 q 1810 E. Hazelton Ave. Stockton, Ca. 95205-6232 Subject: Reclamation Plan (Revised) George Reed, Inc., Application#PA-0400250/Hendrick Ranch, Escalon, California After studying the above Plan, I felt a rebuttal letter needed to be submitted. Much of the information is incorrect or untrue and the mitigation measures are inadequate. Please refer to Applicants Reclamation Plan (Revised)to follow along with rebuttal to Applicants statements. First paragraph: Applicant can fulfill this requirement from sources at their recently approved 80-acre quarry site on River Road near their processing plant. 1. Description of Environmental Setting: C. Hydrology: Excavation has reached close enough to the ground water at other quarry operations (Riverbank and Oakdale area) where citizens have reported that water is oozing from the ground in some areas. Reports are that the quarry outside of Oakdale was shut down because of this same problem. Digging too deep results in ground water contamination. Irrigating over 50 acres with a deep well on property, with no supplementation of available irrigation water, adds to the depletion of ground water and can affect private domestic wells in the area.. Applicant does not state excavation depth. How can this be accepted. I have read that excavation to this degree will lower groundwater levels thus affecting area domestic wells. D. Soil Assessment: Have studies proven that after removing all of the mineral substance for 20 to 60 feet and simply replacing a foot or two of topsoil will sustain the same previous production. I think not. Common since says "NO". Increased amounts of chemical fertilizers will be necessary to attempt to sustain production -- thus more ground water contamination. This operation simply destroys prime farm land. It fails to meet the Williamson Act requirement of restoring the land to former production amounts. E. Project area has been farmed for many more that 30 years. South border of project, I am told, is contiguous to a former Riverbank City Landfill and is so contaminated that a lender would not take it back in a foreclosure proceeding because of clean-up responsibility and costs. if disturbed will contamination leach into project area?