Glendora Council to Have Final Say : District Fails to Block Industrial Permits

Over the opposition of the Bonita Unified School District, the Planning Commission last week granted building permits for the construction of two light-industrial facilities on the city’s eastern edge, near a San Dimas elementary school.

One of the two new plants will house the assembly operations for a firm that makes lighting fixtures. The other plant is being built on speculation and has yet to be leased or purchased.

The City Council will vote on the matter July 12.

Arguing against the permits, school district officials said the city should not allow new industrial plants in the area in light of an incident this year in which acetic acid fumes escaped from Plato Products and made 100 children at Arma J. Shull School sick.

The firm, which uses toxic materials to plate soldering tips, was permitted to build its plant in 1984 on land zoned for light industry without an environmental impact report. After the acid leak, Plato officials agreed to move their plating operations to another facility by Sept. 1.

‘Same Circumstances’

“Our main concern is (to ensure) that the city of Glendora is not setting the platform for a repeat performance of Plato Products,” said Sharon Scott, vice president of the Bonita school board. “These are the exact same circumstances under which Plato was able to come into the picture.”

However, Glendora officials say circumstances in the city’s eastern industrial area have changed considerably since the Plato incident.

The city has placed a moratorium on the construction of plating plants and other facilities using toxic materials. By the time the moratorium expires in February, city planners hope to have drafted a permanent ordinance specifying what types of industry will be permitted in the area.

“It’ll be spelled out very clearly,” said Glendora Redevelopment Coordinator Al Lavin.

Zone Change Suggested

Scott said she would like to believe the city will not allow a situation like that involving Plato Products to happen again, but added: “I don’t have that kind of faith yet.”

One solution to the school district’s concerns, Scott said, would be to change the zoning of the area from light industrial to commercial. However, Planning Commissioner Bob Odell said the land does not lend itself to such a use.

“What kind of commercial (development) do you think could go in there?” Odell said, adding that the so-called clean industry envisioned for the area by planners should not pose a threat to school children. “It’s not what people usually think of as ‘industrial,’ with a lot of chemicals,” Odell said.

Nevertheless, Scott said school children require an extra layer of regulatory protection beyond that provided by city planners.

On Monday, Scott will testify in Sacramento before the senate Toxics and Public Safety Committee in favor of legislation that would give air quality management districts greater regulatory power over factories located within a quarter-mile of a school.

2nd Life for Bill

The bill, AB 3205, is a resurrected version of a bill by Assemblywoman Maxine Waters (D--Los Angeles), which was defeated last month on the Assembly floor.

“In essence it’s the same bill, but there might be some minor alterations,” said Gene Fisher, director of intergovernmental affairs for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, who helped draft the legislation.

AB 3205 was introduced by Assemblywoman Sally Tanner (D-El Monte) as an appropriations bill for hazardous material management planning. After Waters’ original bill was defeated, Tanner allowed Waters to amend the spending bill.

The bill would empower air quality management districts to assess the risks posed by new and existing industrial plants near schools and require control measures when deemed necessary. The bill also would require school districts to consider the risks of emissions from nearby factories when seeking sites for new schools.

Scott will testify on behalf of the school district and also will give the committee written testimony in favor of such legislation from Dr. Paul Papanek, chief of the toxics epidemiology program for the county Department of Health Services.

Waters’ previous bill, along with a similar unsuccessful bill by Assemblyman William H. Lancaster (R--Covina), encountered stiff opposition from pro-industry groups such as the California Manufacturers Assn. and the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance.

However, Fisher said he has met with representatives of the two groups to discuss changes in the language of Waters’ revived bill that could mollify industry opposition.

The main reasons industry opposed the previous bill, Fisher said, was a belief that the legislation was unnecessary and a concern that it would add another level of burdensome regulation.

“They seem to have a fear that somehow we would use this as a vehicle to harass businesses without due cause,” Fisher said. “We told them that it would make the climate better for all businesses. I don’t think any business would want to have the liability for an accidental release (of toxic materials).”