My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0002453
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
6600
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
UP-88-13
>
SU0002453
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/18/2022 5:21:56 PM
Creation date
4/14/2020 11:41:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0002453
PE
2626
FACILITY_NAME
UP-88-13
STREET_NUMBER
6600
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
ENTERED_DATE
10/26/2001 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
6600 S AUSTIN RD
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
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.
/
444
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
Biomass <br /> plant <br /> rejected <br /> said the burden n of p e-t was on <br /> gy <br /> • Falcon, and the waste-to-energy <br /> Supervisors voice firm just didn't provid¢a convinc- <br /> ContfnuedtromB-t ing enough argume t that the <br /> environmental fears- tion because it depends on agri- Planning Commission erred when <br /> cultural waste to function. it rejected the application. <br /> By Christopher Woodard "Wthink After the hearing, Hoblitzell <br /> e nver <br /> The Stockton Record Y definitely said he didn't know what Falcon <br /> San Joa uin Coun su ervisprs liked there's a demand and a need for a Energy will do with the 57-acre <br /> q ty p facility like this,"said James Hob- parcel it owns or whether his firm <br /> the idea of a biomass plant that could litzell IV, a general partner with will try for a permit at a different <br /> convert agricultural waste into fuel pel- Falcon Energy. location. <br /> lets, but they didn't like the idea that <br /> burning oil would be used in the proc- But the supervisors weren't Everyone supports the idea of <br /> ess. swayed. waste recovery plants, but no- <br /> By a 5-0 vote, the supervisors Thurs- body wants them in their back- <br /> Supervisor Douglass W. Wilhoit yard,he said. <br /> day upheld a July 13 decision by the <br /> county Planning Commission rejecting. <br /> Falcon Energy's plans for the $5 million <br /> biomass plant on Stockton's southeast- <br /> ern edge. <br /> "It's our earth. It's our environment, <br /> and we have to be very careful," said <br /> Supervisor William N.Sousa. <br /> The board also was concerned that <br /> the plant appears to be an industrial op- <br /> eration, but.Falcon Energy proposed <br /> building it on 57 acres of agriculturally <br /> zoned land at.the sgutheast corner of <br /> Mariposa and Austin roads. <br /> A dozen neighbors argued against the <br /> plant, saying it would overburden Mari- <br /> posa Road with truck traffic, create a po- <br /> tential fire hazard and pollute the atmo- <br /> sphere with burning waste oil. <br /> Ruth Pilkington complained that the <br /> area already has two garbage dumps and <br /> two prisons and doesn't need a biomass <br /> plant. "Southeast Stockton is fast becom- <br /> ing a dumping ground for facilities no <br /> one else wants,"she said. <br /> Falcon proposed building a plant ca- <br /> pable of grinding up 720 tons of agricul- <br /> tural waste a day. The plant also would <br /> take in as much as 4.3 million gallons of <br /> waste oil a year. <br /> The oil, which would come from agri- <br /> cultural equipment,would be used to dry <br /> the biomass mulch and turn It into fuel <br /> briquettes or feed pellets. Only 10 per- <br /> cent of the oil coming into the plant <br /> would be burned.The rest would be sold <br /> to other recycling firms. <br /> Representatives of Falcon Energy told <br /> the board the plant would improve air <br /> quality in the Valley by reducing agricul- <br /> tural burning in the fields and give farm- <br /> ers a place to get rid of waste oil, rather <br /> than dumping it on the ground. <br /> They also argued that the proposed <br /> plant is essentially an agricultural opera- <br /> See PLANT,B-3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.