Second suit to stop fast-tracking
Wearing their trademark orange and waving orange hats, Liberty Quarry opponents attend a Riverside County Board
of Supervisors hearing on the project. A fourth quarry-related lawsuit seeks to stop the county from putting the
project on the planning fast track.
Another lawsuit has been filed to stop Riverside County from speeding up the review process for surface mines such as the proposed Liberty Quarry.
The suit filed in Riverside Superior Court on Tuesday, Oct. 23, by Save Our Southwest Hills is the fourth legal action regarding the quarry. The citizens group, a leading voice in the quarry opposition movement, is a plaintiff in another quarry-related case, and the city of Temecula has filed two quarry-related suits as well.
The latest suit seeks to overturn the county Board of Supervisors' September decision to add surface mines to the list of projects eligible for fast-tracking, which allows projects to skip the Planning Commission and go straight to the board for approval.
The change could lead to quicker action on the quarry sought for a 414-acre site bordering Temecula. Quarry developer Granite Construction submitted a revised quarry application this summer after supervisors voted 3-2 in May to reject the original proposal.
The suit alleges the county violated the California Environmental Quality Act by saying the fast-track changes were exempt from the act without supporting the exemption through adequate study.
The county also ran afoul of state law and its own land-use ordinance when it failed to have the Planning Commission hold a public hearing on the changes, the suit alleges. And the changes weren't brought to the State Mining & Geology Board for proper review, the suit argues.
County lawyers will review the suit once the county is served and "the county will determine the best course of response," county spokesman Ray Smith wrote in an email.
Earlier this month, Temecula officials filed their own fast-tracking suit. The suit makes similar arguments to the Save Our Southwest Hills litigation, and both plaintiffs want a restraining order blocking the county from using fast-tracking for surface mines.
Save Our Southwest Hills and Temecula also are parties in a separate legal action to de-certify the quarry's environmental impact report, an 8,500-page study paid for by Granite and reviewed by county planners that makes the case for the quarry.
County supervisors in May certified the report even though they denied the quarry. Granite and county lawyers contend the report's certification is legally justified.
The quarry is one of the most contentious land-use projects in county history. First proposed in 2005, the quarry would use explosive blasts to extract aggregate, a construction material consisting of tiny rocks. Asphalt and concrete would also be made on-site.
Granite and its supporters, including trade unions and business groups, say the quarry would support high-paying jobs, generate millions in taxes for the county and help the economy bounce back.
Temecula officials, environmentalists and others contend the quarry would devastate the Temecula Valley with air pollution, truck traffic and damage to a neighboring ecological reserve, among other harmful effects. The Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians maintains the quarry would obliterate a sacred tribal site.
The suit filed in Riverside Superior Court on Tuesday, Oct. 23, by Save Our Southwest Hills is the fourth legal action regarding the quarry. The citizens group, a leading voice in the quarry opposition movement, is a plaintiff in another quarry-related case, and the city of Temecula has filed two quarry-related suits as well.
The latest suit seeks to overturn the county Board of Supervisors' September decision to add surface mines to the list of projects eligible for fast-tracking, which allows projects to skip the Planning Commission and go straight to the board for approval.
The change could lead to quicker action on the quarry sought for a 414-acre site bordering Temecula. Quarry developer Granite Construction submitted a revised quarry application this summer after supervisors voted 3-2 in May to reject the original proposal.
The suit alleges the county violated the California Environmental Quality Act by saying the fast-track changes were exempt from the act without supporting the exemption through adequate study.
The county also ran afoul of state law and its own land-use ordinance when it failed to have the Planning Commission hold a public hearing on the changes, the suit alleges. And the changes weren't brought to the State Mining & Geology Board for proper review, the suit argues.
County lawyers will review the suit once the county is served and "the county will determine the best course of response," county spokesman Ray Smith wrote in an email.
Earlier this month, Temecula officials filed their own fast-tracking suit. The suit makes similar arguments to the Save Our Southwest Hills litigation, and both plaintiffs want a restraining order blocking the county from using fast-tracking for surface mines.
Save Our Southwest Hills and Temecula also are parties in a separate legal action to de-certify the quarry's environmental impact report, an 8,500-page study paid for by Granite and reviewed by county planners that makes the case for the quarry.
County supervisors in May certified the report even though they denied the quarry. Granite and county lawyers contend the report's certification is legally justified.
The quarry is one of the most contentious land-use projects in county history. First proposed in 2005, the quarry would use explosive blasts to extract aggregate, a construction material consisting of tiny rocks. Asphalt and concrete would also be made on-site.
Granite and its supporters, including trade unions and business groups, say the quarry would support high-paying jobs, generate millions in taxes for the county and help the economy bounce back.
Temecula officials, environmentalists and others contend the quarry would devastate the Temecula Valley with air pollution, truck traffic and damage to a neighboring ecological reserve, among other harmful effects. The Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians maintains the quarry would obliterate a sacred tribal site.
No comments:
Post a Comment