SU0013248 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Utility District , the RWQCB, the Environmental Protection Agency and San Joaquin County are all doing studies on the river . The decisions based on these studies will affect this river for many years to come . This quarry project introduces an unknown element . I am concerned that it may affect wise planning for the restoration of this once noble river . I suggest the approval be rescinded and reconsidered , or at least put on hold until these studies are complete . 2 . Please refer to Agenda Item No . 4 , Page 16 , under Conditions of Approval , Item g . , Paragraph 3 . This condition was considered at the September 6 hearing . As' mitigation , staff saw fit to recommend a Condition of Approval based on an Offer of Dedication . It reads , "An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication shall be made on all the site' s riparian habitat in favor of the San Joaquin Open Space and Farmland Trust in order to transfer development rights. " In the observed discussion among Planning Commission members , it was mentioned , repeatedly, how unfair all this mitigation was to Claude C. Wood Company ( CCW ) . There was no mention of the adverse affects to habitat caused by this quarry project and why extensive mitigation was required to offset negative impacts . Mr . Jungeblut ( J•P� ) made a statement to the effect , "We don ' t know anything about this Farmland Trust . They aren ' t even set up to take dedications . " Then there was an unsavory association made by him to the Land Utilization Alliance. "Look what they did with that $300 , 000 they got . " On this note the Commission voted to delete this condition of an Offer of Dedication . Since the hearing , I have had conversations with John Schick, the Vice President of the Farmland Trust and Mark Connolly, the Secretary. They both , emphatically, told me that the Trust is indeed in business and ready to receive dedications. They suggested, Planning Division Staff and the Planning Commission were both informed that the Farmland Trust was operational . 1 object to the deletion of this Dedication based on erroneous in formation and 'wubious comments by the Planning Commission . 1 deman_, that the Pe_ min Application be rescinded , reconsidered and smen. ed to include this condition. 3 . In the September 6 hearing , there was a lack of consideration by the Commission of Conditions recommended by staff to be included in the final project approval . These staff recommendations were based on the comments garnered from agencies and prior public hearings considering the Draft Environmental Impact Report ( DEIR ) . To disregard staff recommendations is disregarding public and agency input . In the preface to the Final EIR ( FEIR) the statement is made , "Revisions to the text DEIR have been made in response to comments received on the DEIR. " Revisions and conditions are to mitigate wanting needs or demonstrated objections over various issues . I give the following example of the disturbing process that was observed: Refer to the September 6 Agenda Item No. 4 . , Page 16 , j . Stan Harris , representing CCW, referred to this condition and asked that it be amended to allow CCW to leave one piece of equipment at the excavation site during periods of extended nonoperation. -7-