Residents urge pause, CEQA review after alleged relocation of waste transfer site to residential area

Susan Ellis, a full-time Big Bear Lake resident, told the Planning Commission the city appears to be relocating or attempting to relocate a waste transfer site from Highway 18 into a residential neighborhood near Cienega Road and said the city has begun grading and tree removal without adequate public notice. "I'm here today to bring your attention to potentially unlawful activity related to this project," Ellis said, and asked the commission to withhold approval until the issues are addressed.

Ellis told the commission she had been told the project was approved by the city council in a closed session and that the public has been excluded from the process. She cited the Big Bear Lake Municipal Code (stated in the record as "1 7 3.29") and said the city is reportedly relying on a temporary use permit (TUP) for the project. "A waste site in a residential area clearly fails that test," Ellis said, arguing the permit requires a finding that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses.

Theresa Carrera, a retired resident who lives nearby, echoed safety and traffic concerns. She said the local intersection at Cienega can be congested during peak tourist traffic and warned that forcing vehicles to make difficult left turns could increase illegal dumping and create hazards: "Imagine you wake up and you find out they're gonna move a dump into your neighborhood, and no notice was given," Carrera said. She also raised concerns about wildlife attractants, saying centralized bins could increase bear activity.

Both speakers claimed the city had not conducted public hearings, environmental review, or traffic studies. Ellis told the commission that, under her reading, issuing a temporary use permit is a discretionary action under the California Environmental Quality Act and therefore requires at least an initial study. She asked the commission to pause the project, require a full CEQA review, and ensure proper public notice and hearings "before any further action is taken." The residents also alleged misrepresentation by staff and urged the commission to investigate whether invalid permits were used.

Commissioners and staff did not debate the merits in the meeting. Instead, commissioners asked staff to provide requested documents and follow up with residents. One commissioner requested a copy of the TUP prior to a neighborhood meeting scheduled for the following day; staff said Kelly Tinker and Mr. Tinker would reach out and provide the requested permit copy to both the neighborhood and commissioners.

The commission did not take formal action on the Cienega Road matter during the meeting. Commissioners reiterated limits on the commission's authority to act on non-agenda items and encouraged residents to contact department heads and their city council representatives. Staff indicated they would provide the TUP and related materials and engage with the neighborhood meeting.