San Luis Obispo Weather: 60.6°F | Humidity: 31% | Pressure: 30.10in (Rising) | Conditions: Clear | Wind Direction: North | Wind Speed: 0.0mph [forecast]

Free Newsletter
    Send the last good SLO picture you took to slo@edhat.com login  twitter  facebook  RSS 

Advertise on Edhat
Advertise on Edhat
News Events Referrals Deals Classifieds Comments About

County Board Upholds Phillips 66 Decision
updated: Mar 14, 2017, 3:09 PM

Source: County of San Luis Obispo

The County of San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors voted 3-1, with District 5 Supervisor Debbie Arnold dissenting, to uphold the County Planning Commission’s decision to deny a permit application for the Phillips 66 Rail Spur Project.

District 1 Supervisor and Board Chair John Peschong recused himself from the Board’s appeals hearing, citing a conflict of interest related to a prior business relationship with Phillips 66.

Two parties – Phillips 66 and Jeff Edwards – appealed the Planning Commission’s decision to deny a permit that would have allowed Phillips 66 to build and operate a rail spur, or an extension to an existing train track, allowing it to import and unload crude oil at its refinery in Santa Maria via up to three trains per week.

The Board held a hearing to consider the appeals over the course of two days this week. More than 150 people spoke during the hearing’s public comment period and the Board reviewed all evidence presented at the hearing, most of which was presented to the Planning Commission hearings on the subject last year.  

The Board’s decision can be appealed to the California Coastal Commission.  Information regarding how to file an appeal is available from the California Coastal Commission.

The Planning Commission held eight hearings last year to consider the Phillips 66 permit application for the project. If it had been approved, each oil train would have been more than 5,100 feet long, consisting of up to 80 tank cars transporting a total of about 2.2 million gallons of crude oil. More than 400 people spoke over multiple days of public testimony during the Planning Commission hearings last year.

The Planning Commission ultimately denied the permit application on October 5, 2016, citing impacts and risks to the community, and inconsistencies with the County General Plan and policies.

# # #

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)


Add Your Comments

Edhat Username



Don't have an Account?

Don't know if you have an account?

Don't remember your account info?


ENJOY HAPPY HOUR! ... Between 4:00pm & 5:00pm only happy comment are allowed on the Edhat Comments Board.

If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all.

Hide Your Handle
NOTE: We are testing a new Comment Preview Page. You must hit OK on the next page to have your comment go live. Send Feedback to ed@edhat.com.

get a handle   |  lost handle




# # # #


Send To a Friend
Your Email
Friend's Email

Top of Page | Printer-Friendly Page

  Home Subscribe FAQ Jobs Contact copyright © 2003-2015  
Edhat, Inc.