Comments harshly criticize environmental report on mining plan in Azusa
By Daniel Tedford, Staff Writer
Posted: 02/21/2010 12:13:42 AM PST
AZUSA - The city Monday will begin to examine pages of comments, critiques and protest letters about an environmental report for mining in the foothills.
Environmental groups, an anti-mining organization, and Duarte officials panned the environmental report on Vulcan Materials Co.'s new mining plan in written comments submitted to Azusa last week.
The report was prepared by consultant Lilburn Corporation.
The letters questioned aggregate reserves and analysis regarding air quality, mining reclamation, replanting of hillsides, and other aspects of the report, according to submitted comments.
Duarte's Mayor Margaret Finlay made a stop at the city with bags full of
hundreds of prepared letters signed by residents critiquing mining and the
environmental report.
"I have been on the City Council for 20 years and I have never seen an issue that has galvanized a community like this," Finlay said.
But the bulk of Duarte's criticisms came in the form of a detailed letter from the City Attorney that contained 60 pages of comments and 327 points of disagreement.
"I think there are so many significant holes in that document that it is going to have to be revised, redone and recirculated," Duarte City Manager Darrell George said. "We have gone through that thing with a fine-tooth comb and it really does appear to be severely flawed."
Officials with Vulcan said the environmental report was an accurate representation
of the project that gave concerned parties the information necessary to make an informed decision."It is unfortunate that some elected officials have chosen to mislead their constituents and called the improvements being recommended at Azusa Rock an expansion," Vulcan spokesman Todd Priest said. "All one has to do is read the independent (environmental report) which clearly indicated that not one additional acre is being mined under the new plan."
Vulcan trusts that Azusa officials and its consultant on the environmental report have been responsible in fulfilling California Environmental Quality Act requirements, Priest said.
Vulcan has a permit to mine 190 acres near Fish Canyon. The company wants to exchange 80 acres of land on its eastern property line for the ability to mine 80 acres near its western property line.
TThe 270-acre Vulcan property sits in the city of Azusa but rests along the Duarte border. For Vulcan to move forward, Azusa officials would have to approve Vulcan's plan to mine the western 80 acres.
Part of Vulcan's proposal calls for the western mining operation to incorporate micro benches. Company officials said when mining is complete, the 1-to-2-foot steps become more naturally part of the mountain slope.
In a mining operation near the eastern side, the company has already carved out 30-foot benches, known as "Mayan steps." If the proposal is approved, the entire project would begin to use the micro-benching technique.
If it is turned down, Vulcan will use the 30-foot benches for mining on the east property line.
Duarte officials took particular exception to the concept of an acreage "swap" referred to in the report. Officials termed the description "inaccurate."
"Therefore, even under Azusa's distorted description of the Project, the Project would not involve a `swap' of even acreage for purposes of disturbing activity," Attorney Jeffrey Melching wrote in his comments. "Rather, only 58.5 acres on the east side would go undisturbed in exchange for the new disturbance of the 80 pristine acres on the west side."
Azusa officials have begun to compile the written comments.
"We are going to respond through the environmental impact report process," Economic and Community Development Asst. Director Conal McNamara said. "I think it is important to allow our consultants to respond back in writing."
The public was given 60 days to provide written comments on the environmental impact report prepared for the Vulcan Materials Co.'s new mining application.
Many of the major stakeholders used the entire 60 days to evaluate the nearly 1,000-page report before submitting their comments last week.
Anti-mining group Save Our Canyon was harshly critical of the report saying it was "seriously flawed" in their comments.
"The purpose of (California Environmental Quality Act) is to fully understand the impact of a proposed project, and, by evaluating the net change in impacts from the current (plan), the (report) does not give the public the information necessary to fully evaluate the proposal," wrote Save Our Canyon leaders in the comments.
The San Gabriel Valley Taskforce of the Sierra Club said members believed the environmental report is "seriously inadequate in several respects," in comments submitted to the city Friday by chairwoman Joan Licari.
"We felt (the report) was inadequate in respect to alternatives, particularly," Licari said.
(626) 962-8811, Ext. 2730
All information and images provided by Save Our Canyon
(626) 629-8335
Send Page
