My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO_1978-1990
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
W
>
WEBER
>
2435
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0440010
>
COMPLIANCE INFO_1978-1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/19/2023 2:14:11 PM
Creation date
7/3/2020 11:13:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
FileName_PostFix
1978-1990
RECORD_ID
PR0440010
PE
4445
FACILITY_ID
FA0001552
FACILITY_NAME
EAST STKN RECYCLE/TRANSFER STATION
STREET_NUMBER
2435
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
WEBER
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95205
APN
15323117
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
2435 E WEBER AVE
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sfrench
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\SW\SW_4445_PR0440010_2435 E WEBER_1982-1990.tif
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
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
y <br /> ~� C�\�pp9, GEORGE • BARBER 222 EAST WEBER AVENUE <br /> ROOM 701 <br /> MEMBER STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA 95202 <br /> BOARD OF SUPERVISORS <br /> FOURTH DISTRICT <br /> TELEPHONE 944-2501 <br /> THORNTON 794.2794 <br /> December 21, 1978 <br /> NICKOLAS J. ISAAK <br /> ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT <br /> III <br /> Calaveras County <br /> Planning DepArtment <br /> Government Center <br /> San Andreas, CA 95249 <br /> Gentlemen: <br /> A draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed F. W. Cattle Company <br /> Project feedlot, disposal site, and recycling facility on the Calaveras/ <br /> San Joaquin County line was sent to my office for review. I sincerely <br /> appreciate the cooperation and courtesy extended to me by the Calaveras <br /> County Planning Department, and I believe that we will be able to resolve <br /> some of the most objectionable aspects of this project, for the good of <br /> both the nearby residents and the project proponents. <br /> The draft EIR does outline a number of measures that would minimize the <br /> project's adverse impacts. However, the most objectionable impacts cannot <br /> be adequately resolved by the proposed measures. The odor created, for <br /> instance, by a 3,000 head feedlot is, in all practicality, unavoidable <br /> and would clearly prevent the project's neighbors from getting the full <br /> enjoyment of their property. Some of the people affected have lived in <br /> this area for many years, have substantial investments in their property, <br /> and would hate to be forced to move. <br /> For the reasons outlined above, I must continue to oppose this project. If <br /> a use permit is granted though, there are some mitigating measures not <br /> mentioned in the EIR that would be helpful. I believe that any use permit <br /> should be conditioned on the following measures, in addition to the <br /> measures proposed in the EIR: <br /> 1, In addition to the domestic fly monitoring program proposed <br /> in the draft EIR, the use permit should be made contingent upon <br /> meeting some objective standard for the fly attraction and <br /> breeding problem. <br /> 2. All heavy truck traffic to and from this project should be <br /> prohibited during the hours of darkness, both for noise and <br /> safety reasons. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.