Board denies appeal of industrial subdivision's OK

The Colusa County supervisors chambers had the feel of a courtroom Tuesday morning, and the verdict favored Mike Adams and his plan to subdivide his industrial property on the south side of the county.

The board denied Gerald and Elaine Rominger's appeal of a Planning Commission decision approving the tentative subdivision map and the county's contention the project as it stands now does not pose any substantial negative impacts on neighboring properties.

The board voted 4-0 with Supervisor Kim Dolbow Vann recusing herself.

The Romingers are not concerned about the map, but rather the impacts on their farming operations by the potential and as yet undefined developments on the property.

They believe the county had a legal obligation to address those potential impacts through the California Environmental Quality Act review process.

Moreover, their attorney, Jonathan Hobbs, said that not only did the county fail to adequately address substantial issues such as traffic, noise, water usage and air quality impacts, but also stumbled procedurally with regards to such things as legal notices.

"This is just not drawing lines on a map," Hobbs said. "This is dividing (property) for development."

Daryl Brun, field supervisor for Blue Diamond Growers, also expressed his concern that traffic issues, particularly with regard to the intersection at County Line Road and Highway 99W are not adequately addressed.

Planning Director Steve Hackney said there are safeguards in place — with conditions placed on the map and language in the 2004 general plan and zoning amendments — to protect neighboring interests.

The language states that even if a proposed use is permitted within a certain zoning, in this case industrial, the county can deny or alter projects that would have "significant environmental impacts" on surrounding areas and uses.

He told the board there are no immediate development plans for the property, and Adams has indicated he wants to divide the parcels to improve financing options for the future.

"I don't think the county is following state law," Gerald Rominger said following the hearing, "and it is costing the county taxpayers money."

Rominger said he will talk to his attorney before deciding what step to take next.

Adams is dividing about 159 acres of land zoned for industrial use into 16 parcels ranging from 1.7 acres to 30.8 acres, county documents state.

It is located at the northwest corner of Grevie and County Line roads, six miles south of Arbuckle and bordering Old Highway 99W.

Hackney said the county's analysis of the project was based on the historical ag-related industrial uses in the county, in that specific region and specifically on what is already on the Adams property.

Those uses include an oil-seed operation, Adams Trucking and some storage facilities.

He said as projects come to the department, they will be reviewed then.

"We will look at the proposal at the time, and they will be subject to conditions as they were approved," Hackney said.

He said even if a project that is non-agricultural in nature were to be proposed, he believes the safeguards are in place.

However, Rominger said protecting neighboring interests in the future depends too much on the good intentions of the county staff, and should be specifically addressed.

He reiterated that what his wife has said before, which is they believe Adams has the right to develop his property as the zoning allows. They just think a proper and extensive environmental review on the worst-case scenarios should take place now, not later.

A familiar foe of the Adams and the county, the Romingers at one time sued the county over the original plans of putting in industrial zoning in the largely agricultural area, where Adams ultimately located.

That suit was settled after the county re-addressed issues involving Rominger-owned property, and reworked many of the conditions attached to the use of the industrial property.