You must sign in to take advantage of that feature. Enter your user name and password below. No user ID yet? Get one for free.


Forgot your password?
About Jburger


Real Name:
JAMES BURGER
Member Since:
March 14, 2006
Last Signed In:
November 16, 2009
Profile Views:
4850
Blog Views:
61497
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Wind, Valley and Driver Road.
Won't you be my Neighbor(hood Development)?
Concrete Crush Again
Concrete Crush
Evacuation plan - some maps
County budget report - Q1 2009-2010 budget
Isabella Dam evacuation plan
Supervising growth plans.
Health Agency - will supes bless merger?
Supes morning.
Archives
July 06
August 06
September 06
October 06
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
November 08
December 08
January 09
February 09
March 09
April 09
May 09
June 09
July 09
August 09
September 09
October 09
November 09
E-mail and Print
Sign up to get a downloadable, printable magazine of this blog with the Quirks of Kern Printcast.

Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


Jburger - > Quirks of the County -> Concrete Crush Again
Concrete Crush Again

We're on at the board of Supervisors.

Kern County Planning Department chief Jim Ellis is delivering the staff report on the M&B Land Development concrete-crushing project.

Both the businessman who proposed the project - Mark Polhamus - and neighbors have appealed the decision of the Kern County Planning Commission to approve a two-year use permit with a re-review of the project after that time.

Neighbors don't want the project approved at all.

Polhamus wants more than two years to operate this add-on to his flat-bed truck rental business.

 

 

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by Jburger on Tuesday, November 3, 2009 at 02:21 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 366 times
17 comments from 3 users

1

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 02:30 PM

A couple of interesting twists — conditions of approval that would limit truck trips and limit the amount of material that could be delivered to the site.

Ellis is also noting one of the big rubs for both sides in this dispute - that development in the area in the last 10 to 20 years have put industrial zoning on Rosedale Lane cheek by jowl to surrounding residential development.\

 

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 02:33 PM

Ellis said the use, for the zoning, is "pretty benign."

There are much worse uses that could be approved there.

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 02:37 PM

McQuiston is laying out the ground rules.

Both appealants will be allowed to state their case. Then public comment. Then rebuttal from the two appelants.

Roger McIntosh is speaking for M&B.

He's making the point that the industrial zone has been in the area for decades. The homes are new. City and county officials justified allowing homes in the area becaus there were buffers between them and the potential industrial groups - railroad tracks run along Santa Fe Way to the west and the Mosquito and Vector Control District has it's airfield to the east.

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 02:42 PM

McIntosh is saying its not economically feasible to put the project in only to risk losing the right to operate the crusher onsite two years later.

 

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 02:46 PM

Curtis Pierce, speaking for the neighbors, is up.

Recycling is good...but not for their neighborhood.

You find yourself in a position to fix a situation that never should have happened. This was an industrial area. Homes should have never been allowed to be built here," Pierce said.

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 02:53 PM

Catherine Jones is speaking.

She's arguing that controls on the type of concrete Polhamus will be allowed to crush need to be stronger and that without sample testing there is no way to assure substances like asbestos aren't pulverised and pushed up into the air.

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:06 PM

Carol Bender is speaking.

"Quite simply put it's too close to neighborhoods," she said in summarizing the case of the neighbors.

 

posted by airqualityguy on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:10 PM

Catherine Jones should have brought up the coal ash often used in concrete contains many heavy metals like mercury.  County staff should be aware of that because of the pending Calash application.  It is usually considered ok because concrete is so stable.  But, not when it is crushed!


posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:15 PM

There were a lot of passionate arguements against the project - air quality, noise, traffic, zoning.

Now we have people speaking in support of the project.

Cathy Merlo - a resident is speaking in support of the staff recommendation. Of course she suggested the two year provisional permit during public comments at the Plan Comm meeting....

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:17 PM

Quick rebuttals from both sides sends this back to the staff.

 

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:21 PM

McIntosh agreed to ban all coated feed stocks on the project and staff immediately recommended a condition to implement that suggestion.

Watson is up.

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:26 PM

"Our responsibility is to make sure we protect public health and safety," Watson said.

But they also have to protect property rights.

He's saying that federal air quality standards must be me if the project is approved before the air control district or the project doesn't open.

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:39 PM

"My thought is that the applicant has the right to do most of what he wants to do without a conditional use permit," Watson said. "At this point I am not willing to support it."

He's asking if the applicant wants to respond.

McIntosh jumped up.

Watson said he'd like to limit the number of days the crushing plant was in operation.

Oviatt is saying staff can't make findings to support that idea.

Watson is pushing for a continuence to increase the amount of material that can be crushed in one day so the number of days the crushing can go on may be reduced.

posted by Barneyman on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:43 PM

Our "zoning" sucks.  Why this conflict in uses was every allowed is a mystery or is it just good political planning by the Board?

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:53 PM

Rubio will support Watson's recommendation.

Maggard said he doesn't think there is a win-win in this situation.

He said the decisions that have put this zoning conflict in place are responsible for that.

The stink of those decisions stick to both the city and county, he said.

Planning chief Lorelei Oviatt said staff are hoping to fix some of the glaring zoning conflicts in the community through the General Plan update process.

posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 03:56 PM

Looks like the delay fix is in.


posted by Jburger on Nov 3, 2009 at 04:09 PM

The project is referred back to staff to hire a consultant and conduct the study.


1

  (You need to be signed in to leave a comment)

Advertisement