- This topic has 320 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 7 months ago by
paramount.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 17, 2012 at 3:49 PM #738268February 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM #738270
scaredyclassic
ParticipantForget paradise put up a parking lot
February 17, 2012 at 5:17 PM #738274NotCranky
Participant[quote=walterwhite]Forget paradise put up a parking lot[/quote]
Call something paradise-kiss it goodbye.February 17, 2012 at 8:38 PM #738278paramount
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]
paramount, congrats on your so-far-successful “grass roots” efforts at NIMBYism but I don’t think it’s over quite yet. I’ve seen a lot of this in my lifetime and can emphatically say here that the “fat lady” still has to perform her encores :=]see: http://piggington.com/ot_victory_gravel_pit_denied%5B/quote%5D
BG: Trust me, it’s all but 100% over. Sure, all probability lies between 0 and 1, but never == 0 or 1.
But in reality it would literally cost many millions and many years to restart the rezoning process; all the way from a DEIR to the FEIR. And community opposition would not be diminished.
They could choose to sue the county, but on what basis; because they didn’t get their way?
On a personal note, the oppositions PR Manager and I graduated from the same university, so that even though I played a relatively small role, it was still satisfying in a way. This particular university is known for advocating environmental justice for lack of a better term.
We will always be vigilant to these types of threats.
For now, it’s over.
February 17, 2012 at 11:02 PM #738280bearishgurl
Participant[quote=paramount]…They could choose to sue the county, but on what basis; because they didn’t get their way?…[/quote]
It has nothing to do with this. It has to do with the fact that the county may have not performed their “ministerial duty” or performed it properly. The quarry could allege that the county succumbed to (political) NIMBYism pressure instead of following the law or the rules/directives set forth by the county’s own ordinances and/or Charter.
My experience has told me that we shouldn’t count our chickens before they actually hatch. We have no way of knowing which remedy (if any) the quarry will try to resurrect their rights in this case.
Stay tuned. It’s never over ’til it’s over …
February 18, 2012 at 12:38 AM #738283paramount
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]
It has nothing to do with this. It has to do with the fact that the county may have not performed their “ministerial duty” or performed it properly. The quarry could allege that the county succumbed to (political) NIMBYism pressure instead of following the law or the rules/directives set forth by the county’s own ordinances and/or Charter.My experience has told me that we shouldn’t count our chickens before they actually hatch. We have no way of knowing which remedy (if any) the quarry will try to resurrect their rights in this case.
Stay tuned. It’s never over ’til it’s over …[/quote]
The permit was turned down by the planning commission and now the board of supervisors.
We will stay tuned, and yes Granite has deep pockets, but then so do we.
Power to the People!!!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.