Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF COLTON <br />AGENDA REPORT <br />FOR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 16, 2004 <br />TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br />FROM: DAVID R. ZAMORA <br />COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR <br />Item #1 <br />SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PACIFIC RAIL INDUSTRIES METAL SHREDDING <br />AND TRANSLOADING OPERATION - 785 EAST M STREET AND <br />PORTIONS OF UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD PROPERTY <br />DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2004 <br />BACKGROUND: <br />This matter involves an appeal of the Planning Commission's October 12, 2004 decision to <br />certify an environmental impact report (EIR) and approve modifications to an existing <br />conditional use permit (D-55-01) to permit the following activities on property located at 785 "M" <br />Street and portion of Union Pacific Railroad property: <br />1) The installation and operation of a metal (vehicle) shredder as an expansion of an <br />existing scrap metal facility (Pacific Rail Industries). <br />2) The construction of an approximate 30' x 250' metal building to store shredder <br />residue and fluff. <br />3) An increase in the volume of transloading (the transfer of goods from rail cars to <br />trucks for distribution) from 25,100 tons to 37,620 tons per month. <br />4) A major variance to exceed the height of a wall to be located on the south portion <br />of the property from 8 feet in height to 13 feet in height. <br />A complete description of the project and its impacts is provided in the Planning <br />Commission Staff Reports of August 24, 2004 and October 12, 2004 (attached). <br />PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS: <br />Prior to approving the project, the Planning Commission held public hearing workshops <br />and public hearings on March 9, 2004, March 23, 2004, August 24, 2004 and October 12, 2004. At <br />each public workshop and hearing all members of the public were given an opportunity to <br />present information and testimony concerning the project and its associated EIR. In fact, several <br />comments led to project changes that were incorporated into the project during the hearing <br />process. For example, in response to concerns about aesthetics and the attractiveness of the <br />project from the street, the applicant amended the project to include a taller, more decorative <br />fence along the south portion of the property. In response to concerns about shredder fluff <br />blowing and escaping the project boundaries, the applicant amended the project to include <br />construction of a 30' x 250 metal building to store the fluff and prevent its escape. In response, to <br />C:\Documents and Settings�anthony.beaumon�Desktop\#staff report.DOC <br />