The Cupertino Courier

News

Hanson Cement mining plan draws fire

By Cody Kraatz

Residents and environmental activists are angry the Santa Clara County Planning Department did not do more to notify the public of the planned expansion of a cement plant and limestone mining operation in the hills above Cupertino and Los Altos.

The expansion requires an environmental impact report with public input, and a June 20 meeting at Cupertino City Hall started the process. The county expects to finish the EIR by September or October, after which it needs Santa Clara County Planning Commission approval.

"I'm very concerned. They're already putting out a lot of pollution from that plant," said Joyce Eden, who lives near Stevens Creek and Foothill boulevards. "Expanding the quarry will only put more particulate into the air. We don't need it, we don't want it and it's not OK."

The 3,200-acre Hanson Permanente Cement, which puts out 1.6 million tons of cement per year, wants to expand its reclamation plan with Santa Clara County, allowing it to mine 60 to 70 acres on a 200-acre piece of undisturbed land, possibly in 2009.

County planners, facing vociferous public criticism and opposition, agreed to extend the public comment period by 30 days, ending on July 25. The meeting was held on day 25 of a 30-day public comment period.

"The last thing we want to do is shut down the public comment period," said Rob Eastwood, a senior county planner. The meeting was publicized in the legal advertising sections of several local newspapers, but not in the Mercury News. The county and city of Cupertino did not contact Courier staff, which heard about the meeting from residents.

Some residents demanded a second meeting, and Mark Connolly, a county planner, said this may be possible. Residents trying to organize a task force through Stevens Creek Elementary School parents' group said they would contact county Supervisor Liz Kniss.

The reclamation plan, which is required by state law for mining to continue, would include 917 acres, up from the 330 covered under the original 1985 plan, which expires in 2010.

The plan would specify what Hanson is required to do to minimize its effects on the environment, including nearby residence, and restore its land to a natural state so it can be used in the future.

"We fill that hole up, we revegetate it and we make it look basically like it looked before we mined," said Connolly. Hanson representatives said filling the mining pits completely is not feasible or required.

Several residents honed in on the county's assertion in the meeting announcement that a "no-project alternative" option would not be analyzed because the company has a legal right to mine there.

Persistent audience questions revealed that if the EIR process found no way to solve the environmental impacts of the expansion, the reclamation plan could not be approved and Hanson could no longer mine after 2010. Eastwood said the county is required to consider such an option, but avoided saying how it would be considered.

A state audit in 2006 found Hanson and eight other mines in the county had violated state mining laws. The report by the state Mining and Geology Board found "little evidence in the administrative record demonstrating that the county has the understanding or will to enforce state regulations."

Nearby residents told the planners that their cars have been hit with rocks and dirt from the trucks that travel from the mine down Foothill Boulevard. Representatives from a local preschool said they wanted a careful analysis of the effects of diesel fumes on young children. Deborah Jamison, a Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society representative and active Cupertino resident, said her group had not been notified and asked for an intensive and long-term biological study.

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District has named Hanson as one of the top stationary air polluters in the county, most of that coming from an approximately 250-foot kiln it heats with coal 24 hours per day, seven days per week.

The audience struggled to understand the layout of the mine and the proposed project because neither the county nor Hanson brought aerial images or project plans to the meeting. The plans were left behind because of a miscommunication, said Eastwood, adding that visuals and other information would be available on the planning office website.

For more information, visit www.sccplanning.org. Mail comments to the County of Santa Clara Planning office, attn: Mark J. Connoly, County Governement Center, 70 W. Hedding St., San Jose CA 95110, or call Connolly at 408.299.5786.