The San Diego County Board of Supervisors made a decisive move on Wednesday by unanimously rejecting a significant use permit for the proposed Cottonwood Sand Mine near Rancho San Diego.
This decision followed a public forum that lasted over two and a half hours and featured nearly 100 speakers, including local residents, union representatives, environmental advocates, and tribal members.
Concerns raised by the community centered on various issues, notably potential increases in traffic, noise pollution, particulate matter from mining activities, and the visual impact on the area’s aesthetics.
One resident drew a stark comparison, stating that allowing the mine would equate to a “Tijuana sewage crisis 2.0.”
The County’s Planning Commission had previously deadlocked with a 3-3 vote on July 9, failing to secure the four votes necessary for approval amid an ongoing vacancy.
During their presentation on Wednesday, staff members from Planning and Development Services spoke in favor of denying the proposal, emphasizing the incompatibility of the project with the surrounding community.
Vice Chair Monica Montgomery Steppe, who represents the affected District 4, acknowledged the demand for affordable sand for construction projects but expressed skepticism about whether the economic advantages would be felt locally.
“I want to make sure that we’re not just giving up quality of life in the community for a project that may not benefit our residents,” she commented.
Similarly, Supervisor Joel Anderson, whose District 2 encompasses part of the proposed mining area, articulated a recognition of the developer’s efforts but maintained that “sometimes projects don’t fit their community.”
Before casting her vote, Supervisor Paloma Aguirre reflected on the economic implications of the mine but ultimately sided with the community’s concerns over the potential noise and safety impacts.
“The quality of life impacts that this project would bring are very significant,” Aguirre said, expressing her reluctance to support the project.
Jim Desmond, known for advocating more housing options, admitted he faced a tough decision regarding the mine but expressed concerns that its integration into the community “doesn’t fit well.”
“The (existing) housing was there first,” Desmond pointed out, underscoring the established residential character of the area.
Following the Board of Supervisors’ unanimous vote, the future steps of Cottonwood Cajon ES, the listed developer, remained uncertain.
Jennifer Lynch, an attorney representing the developer, could not be reached for comment following the verdict.
Community activists and opponents of the mining project, including Barry Jantz, a consultant and founding member of StopCottonwoodSandMine.org, expressed satisfaction with the Board’s decision.
Jantz noted, “The board’s vote meant it saw it exactly the same way we did. It’s just an incompatible use in the middle of an established residential area.”
During the meeting, Lynch urged the Board to consider an appeal, highlighting the site’s long history, which dates back 75 years, during which mining activities occurred periodically.
She stated, “Even after a nearby golf course was completed, mining occurred in the 1970s, between 2007-09, and even as late as 2016.”
Defending the project, Lynch argued that it had undergone extensive planning and environmental assessments, asserting that mining operations would not create significant adverse effects on noise, air, or water quality.
image source from：timesofsandiego
