Comments on: Liberty Quarry & Private Property Rights

By: Jonnie

Jonnie — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:37:51 +0000

THE VERDICT IS FINALLY HERE…we know longer need to question whether or not the proposed Liberty Quarry would have a positive or negative effect.

The below quote is extracted from Riverside County Planning Department’s cover letter for the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on Liberty Quarry. This statement is also contained in the DEIR itself, written by Granite’s consultants:

“DEIR No. 475 (Liberty Quarry) determined that the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality and Traffic/Transportation, which cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition, the DEIR determined that the proposed project would contribute to cumulatively considerable and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality (criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases), Biological Resources (wildlife movement), Traffic, Transportation, and Utilities (water supply), which cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance. As a result of the potential significant and unavoidable impacts, adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be required in order for the project to be approved.”

Read this twice if necessary…No more debates….please!

The Temecula Valley is currently known for its clean air, wineries and destination tourists. The question now is: What affect might these significant and unavoidable impacts which cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance have on our economy as a whole, our housing and commercial industries, and/or loss of tourism revenue currently generating over $600 million/yr. resulting in $23 million/yr. in state, county and local taxes, and employing over 6,000 people? (Figures from commissioned 2008 Study by Dean Runyan & Associates using 2007 figures)

By: Jonnie

Jonnie — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:34:03 +0000

In reference to G.W.’s comment of 9/4/09, the Liberty Quarry EIR consultant WAS NOT on the approved list of companies provided by the County prior to Granite Construction’s application. I believe you will find they were placed on this list only after Granite requested this.

By: Gene Wunderlich

Gene Wunderlich — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:39:22 +0000

If you want immediate response I’d suggest you read the EIR, ask Granite Construction or the City of Temecula. This is a real estate website. We have attempted to present both sides of this issue as it impacts our community both on this site and at our meetings. If you want expert opinions on silica and emissions you should have attended the Granite open houses last month where the authors of the EIR were present to answer your questions.

And please don’t trot out the old canard that Granite paid for the EIR therefore it’s biased. Granite is mandated by law to pay for the EIR (as is the developer of any other project in the county). But they must select from a group of companies provided by the county to do the actual work – they don’t get to pick their own experts and shills. The EIR is prepared in privacy, provided to the county for review and only after the county has had a chance to pick it apart or request additional information is Granite and the public allowed to see it.

By: Amy Capehart

Amy Capehart — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:51:00 +0000

Interesting how the responses is’nt immediate now!!

By: Anaiah Byrd

Anaiah Byrd — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 00:36:00 +0000

Explain the damage caused by the silica dust, and the emissions of diesel fuel it will take to transport all of this aggregate!! Silica dust is lethal even in small amounts inhaled, and the smog from the fuel emissions is cutting into our ozone layer which is already being depleted by the current aggregate transport system we have going (as well as other factors) you can’t possible believe this project will help that!

By: Gene Wunderlich

Gene Wunderlich — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 01:00:11 +0000

I’ll just address a couple fact-check issues in your post – the main demand for aggregate is not for building houses but for general infrastructure. In spite of the economy demand continues for roadway and other projects requiring aggregate. Dr. Husing is a long-time and well respected Inland Empire economist. His opinions and prognostications were well received by the City before he published his economic analysis and I suspect his opinions will be valued again after this process is over – regardless of which party wins the day. As you may also be aware, the cities (Temecula) attempt to annex the property was denied by LAFCO. The decision is now in the hands of our County Supervisors.

By: Anaiah Byrd

Anaiah Byrd — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 23:23:25 +0000

What about the dust expelled from digging up this granite, its deadly not helpful. The granite can be found else where we dont need granite right now the main demand is in building houses our economy is to bad to be worrying about digging for granite. Does this Dr. john even live in temecula or around the granite quarry area and what “city” do you mean because the people of Temecula concious of what this could do to our environment are not for this proposal!

By: Luis Hernandez

Luis Hernandez — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:19:21 +0000

I’ve been living in Temecula for the last 7 years. I drive to San Diego at least twice a week. I can’t imagine a quarry in this beautiful place. This is terrible. Why don’t they consider the numerous rocky hills on freeway 8 (going to El Centro from La Mesa)?

By: Gene Wunderlich

Gene Wunderlich — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:35:05 +0000

I should also point out that the Environmental Impact reports prepared both by Granite Construction AND by the City (at taxpayers expense), support the project. An economic model prepared by pre-eminent local economist Dr.John Husing also supports the project and numerous health studies all indicate no negative health effects from the location.