HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08261986 - T.9 T.9
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on August 26 , 1986 , by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fanden, McPeak, Torlakson, Powers
NOES: None
. ABSENT: Supervisor Schroder
ABSTAIN: None
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Hearing on Proposed Ordinance Requiring Land Use Permits
for Development Projects Involving Hazardous Materials
or Wastes
The Chairman convened the hearing on the proposed
ordinance requiring land use permits for development projects
involving hazardous wastes or materials.
. Harvey Bragdon, Director, Community Development Department,
advised of meetings with members of the Task Force and industry who
participated in the development of the proposed ordinance. He
advised that there are some areas within the ordinance that need
further work, but recommended that the ordinance under consideration
today be adopted as an interim measure and direct his office to make
the necessary changes as may be deemed necessary for inclusion in
the final ordinance.
Supervisor McPeak referred to the section of the ordinance
on exemptions and inquired at what time a facility operating
according to laws in place at the time of its application would be
required to have a land use permit.
Mr. Bragdon noted that industrial facilities handling
hazardous waste had been required to have a land use permit. He
advised that if the facility presently in existence was to remodel
or modernize, as long as it didn' t substantially change the amount
of hazardous waste or hazardous materials handled, did not increase
personnel or production, then that facility would not be required to
have a land use permit under this proposed ordinance. Mr. Bragdon
concluded that if an industrial facility were to increase the amount
of hazardous waste or the amount of hazardous material handled, an
application would have to be made for a land use permit.
Supervisor McPeak advised that it was her understanding
that the proposed ordinance would contain a set of performance
standards; if industry met them, then there would be a review by the
County; and if those performance standards continued to be met, that
operation would not be subject to public review. She stated that
she could envision industries going on for years without ever having
to secure an initial land use permit that would provide the quantifiable
data base for evaluating future proposals for remodeling, expansion,
or replacement projects. She noted that lack of these standards
would make it difficult to verify that the activity is substantially
the same. Supervisor McPeak requested that this concern be
addressed by staff.
Mr. Bragdon advised that the Task Force expressed concern
with the issue of grandfathering in which an industrial facility,
because of changes in methods or operation, would have the ability
to more or less exchange one hazardous material for another. He
commented on the need to resolve this issue because of the fact that
one hazardous chemical being replaced by another might have a dif-
ferent impact on people in a particular area.
The Chairman declared the hearing open.
Hal Downie, Industrial Association, 131 Pebble Lane,
Alamo, advised of his Association's participation in the development
of the proposed ordinance. He referred to the definition of a deve-
lopment project to mean a new permanent structure or facility to be
constructed in or on land which will be used to manage hazardous
waste or hazardous materials. He advised that the Task Force did
not approach the land use permit issue for heavy industry that was
not involved in hazardous waste or hazardous materials. Mr. Downie
noted that the Zoning Administrator would have to make a deter-
mination if a proposed development or expansion project could have
an administrative permit or be required to apply for a land use per-
mit. He further noted that the proposed ordinance would provide
industry with a checklist enabling them to determine their ability
to meet the provisions contained in the exemption portion of the
ordinance. Mr. Downie expressed the belief that the proposed ordi-
nance will provide the framework for heavy industry to retain its
share in this County' s economy and at the same time meet the
environmental concerns of the Hazardous Waste Task Force. He urged
adoption of the ordinance as an interim measure.
Earl MacIntyre, U.S.S.-POSCO Industries, P . 0. Box 471,
Pittsburg 94565 , noted that his company has been in operation since
1920 and has adherred to ordinances or laws in place since the plant
was established as well a during those periods when the operation
was expanded or modernized. He explained that the facilities as
they have been improved upon were modified to be more efficient,
more productive, and create less of an environmental problem. Mr.
MacIntyre advised that it is the desire of U.S.S.-POSCO Industries
to have remodel/expansion programs addressed administratively by a
body that has experience in acknowledging that his firm is in
compliance with all those concerns: if his firm decides to start
manufacturing other products or diversify its operation, then an
application for a land use permit would be justified. He expressed
the belief that the proposed ordinance allows county staff to make
the appropriate determinations.
Supervisor McPeak inquired if U.S.S.-POSCO Industries is
securing additional environmental quality permits from regional
agencies relative to its operation.
Mr. McIntyre responded that under current law his firm is
required to notify appropriate regulatory agencies of changes in
operating procedures to make the products currently being made.
Tom Adams, attorney representing electricians, boiler-
makers and steamfitters, 1875 S. Grant Street, Suite 600, San Mateo,
expressed a desire to participate in the structuring of the proposed
ordinance. He expressed reservations that the proposed ordinance
defines "substantial expansion" if it results in an increase in the
use of toxic substances by 50 percent more than present use. He
noted that the ordinance does not address expansion which is going
to increase toxic substances by 25 or 10 percent over their present
use. Mr. Adams recommended the incorporation of a procedure
enabling public entities to make a determination on proposals which
do not have established performance criteria under an existing land
use permit. He expressed the need for environmental protections and
noted that just receiving permits from certain regulatory agencies
addressing one environmental issue or another should not be
construed to mean that the project is in compliance with water or
clean air quality. Mr. Adams expressed concern with the noticing
requirements relative to an administrative determination made by the
Zoning Administrator rendering implementation of the appeal section
somewhat difficult. He expressed support for the development of a
performance standard and suggested that it not be limited to terms
of raw tonnage.
Harry L. Hale, Council of Industries, 943 Hansley Street,
Richmond, urged the Board to adopt the ordinance as an interim
measure subject to resolving some of the issues identified this day.
Board members discussed the noticing procedure that would
establish the appeal period for administrative decisions on certain
project requests. They expressed an interest in directing staff to
draft language for inclusion in the proposed ordinance setting
forth noticing procedures to define the appeal period.
Supervisor McPeak advised that her major concern is what
triggers a land use permit initially. She expressed concern that
there is no documentation to state what an industrial facility is
producing and how a judgmental decision can be made to determine
that modernization/renovation of a facility will produce substan-
tially the same product. She noted that hazardous waste facilities
have been required to have a land use permit while facilities
handling hazardous materials do not. She proposed that if an
industrial company applies for a building permit to provide for
expansion, remodeling, or renovation of an existing facility, it
should be at that point that the applicant must secure a land use
permit if one hade not been previously granted.
Board members agreed that the thrust of the proposed ordi-
nance is to regulate industries that are managing or handling hazar-
dous waste. Supervisor McPeak requested that a requirement for land
use permits be included in the proposed ordinance since there is no
provision for one in a HI area except for what is required by state
law for hazardous waste facilities.
There being no further discussion, IT IS BY THE BOARD
ORDERED that the hearing on the proposed ordinance is continued to
September 9 , 1986 at 2:30 p.m.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that County Counsel is REQUESTED to
incorporate revisions to the ordinance as requested by the Board for
consideration on September 9 , 1986.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Director of Community
Development is REQUESTED to review the revisions with the Task Force
and report their recommendations to the Board.
[hereby certify thrt this I:.a tru ams carr ect copy of
an action taken and entered on the mina:ez ci ule
CC:: County Counsel
Director, C.D.D. Board of Supervisors on the date shov;n.ATTEST-ED: /�W-2
PHIL BATCHEIZR, Clark of t;-,e Board
of Supervisors and County Adw.,inistraior
By a=/a2t , Deputy