HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12171985 - T.14 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA �COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on December 17, 1985 , by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Fanden
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None RESOLUTION NO. 85/735
- ----------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Pacific Thermonetics, Inc. Co-Generation Project, Crockett
WHEREAS on June 4 , 1985 the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors determined to oppose the Pacific Thermonetics, Inc.
(PTI) proposal to build a co-generation faciity along Loring Avenue
at the California & Hawaiian (C&H) Sugar Refinery, Crockett, unless
the facility was relocated and other changes made to its project,
and
WHEREAS PTI has relocated the project to a location
northerly of the bulk sugar bins and has otherwise modified its
project to eliminate any objectionable features and has provided
numerous mitigation measures toward making the project a good
neighbor; and
WHEREAS the installation of of co-generation would provide
a considerable savings in energy costs and consumption while making
the refinery more efficient;
WHEREAS this Board of Supervisors has not studied the
issue of size and takes no position on it;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board •of Supervisors
of Contra Costa County ENDORSES the PTI site reconfiguration and
mitigation measures committed to by PTI to the California Energy
Commission to offset previously identified concerns, and EXPRESSES a
willingness for the County to work with PTI in attempting to resolve
any outstanding issues.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this resolution and
accompanying staff report be forwarded to the California Energy
Commission and other affected parties.
1 hereby certify that this is a tnee andcorre ct ec+p;-of
an action taken and entered on tate mlret:te:a VA.Lie
Board of Supe Iso on the date sshW&n.
ATTESTED:
PHIL QATCHELQR,Clerk of tho Board
of Supervisoro and County Administrator
cc: County Administrator 9 .�,
Community Development y ---'Deputy
County Counsel
Pacific Thermonetics, Inc.
C & H Refinery
California Energy Commission
RESOLUTION NO. 85/735
SECOND REPORT ON CROCKETT CO-GENERATION PLANT
On June 4, 1985, the Board of Supervisors took action on the Community Development
Department's May 6, 1985 report on the Pacific Thermonetics, Inc. (PTI) Co-Generation
plant at the California and Hawaiian (C & H) plant in Crockett. While there were several
parts to that Board action, the most important statement was on the location of the
proposed co-generation facility. The Board order on this item states:
"EXPRESS the County's strong opposition to the PTI existing configuration, but
not at this time to the PTI application for a co-generation facility at the C & H
site. This would specifically allow for consideration of the reconfiguration of
the proposal from the parking lot location along Loring Avenue to a location
northerly on the C & H property. . .
Supervisor Fanden commented that the intent of the above action is to make it
clear to all that the Board's opposition presently focuses on the use of -the
parking lot along Loring Avenue as the site of the proposed co-generation
facility, but that the Board is open to further dialogue on the merits of a
reconfiguration of the facility at C & H. If PTI and C do H modify their
application before the California Energy Commission based on such a reconfigur-
ation, staff is directed to prepare a new report on the application and the Board
will schedule additional public hearings to consider taking a position on the
project. If no reconfiguration is requested, staff is directed to oppose the
application in it's entirety."
PTI and C do H subsequently agreed to a reconfigured location immediately north of the
existing bulk sugar storage bins along the Carquinez Strait. This report focuses on the
potential County position on this revised proposal.
Why Take Action At This Time
The California Energy Commission (CEC) subcommittee handling this application has
requested the initial position of the County on this, reconfigured site location for CEC
consideration. Staff feels that enough information_ currently exists for the County to
respond to that request.
LOCATION AND NATURE OF THE RECONFIGURED PROJECT
PTI proposed to construct a 200 megawatts co-generation facility at the Crockett C & H
refinery; project operation is proposed to begin 24 months after State Energy Commission of
the application for certification. The original site configuration was located on the
southeast portion of the refinery compound adjacent to Loring Avenue. The perimeter of
the reconfigured site is located approximately 100 feet from the perimeter of the original
site location. The site is located directly north of the bulk sugar storage bins abutting the
Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The site is approximately 2.6 acres in size; the proposed
site plan of the facility is attached. Some of C be H's existing warehousing facilities will
need to be relocated to allow for the reconfiguration.
2
The project still contains three principal components: a co-generation facility, a trans-
mission system and a gas main. The facility is designed to supply steam for the sugar
refinery while supplying electrical power to PG&E through that utilities transmission/
distribution system.
A plot plan showing the reconfigured site is shown as Figure 1 and an aerial photo of the site
is included as Figure 2.
THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION PROCESS AND STATUS REPORT
As established in State law, the California Energy Commission has final jurisdiction for
project consideration on all state regulated concerns. The Commission has the authority to
override local governmental plans and policies, but only upon making specific findings. As
such, the County has limited direct decision making responsibilities over this application. It
does have the opportunity and the obligation to participate in this state process to insure
that its viewpoints are presented.
During the project review process, the Commission will examine the design and operation of
the facility and is charged with reviewing:
- the need for the facility,
- the facility's safety and reliability,
- the project's compliance with all applicable laws and standards,
- its effect on public health and safety, and
- its potential to cause significant environmental impacts.
Since the project was shifted to the new location in July, a considerable amount of written
material has been prepared and distributed on this project. The Commission and their staff
have progressed through the discovery phase of the program (data requests) and the
Commission staff will be releasing a preliminary staff analysis on the project on or around
December 20, 1985. A final decision on the application for certification is due on March 15,
1986 by the full Energy Commission. Given this time line, it is appropriate that the County
take a position on the project at this time.
BASIC COUNTY ISSUES RELATED TO THE RECONFIGURED SITE
This is a review of the significant issues, among others, raised in the May 6, 1985 staff
report.
County General Pian
The C do H property was designated Industrial in the 1984 Crockett Area General Plan. That
plan policy was a major issue in the originally proposed project location, because it would
have placed a major new industrial facility across Loring Avenue immediately adjacent to
existing homes. The new plant location is in an area entirely designated and long committed
to industrial use. The reconfigured site does not have general plan land use issues associated
with it.
3
County Zoning
The original Loring Avenue site was on land zoned Multiple Family Residential (M-12) and,.
Retail Business (R-B). The reconfigured site is on land entirely zoned Heavy Industrial (H-I).
This eliminates zoning as a County issue on this project.
Relationship To Existing Land Use
To the immediate south of the reconfigured site is the main Southern Pacific Railroad line
from the Bay Area to the Central Valley. Below that are the bulk sugar bin storage
facilities. Those facilities and a parking lot (the originally proposed site) separate the
proposed plant from the residential uses south of Loring Avenue. Since the relocated site is
presently utilized for industrial purposes, it's shift from one industrial use to another does
not create new land use interface issues. While there are issues dealing with the impact of
the plant on the adjacent area which need to be mitigated, the relocated site minimized the
problem dramatically.
It must be pointed out that C & H is placed on a very small urban site, and alternative
locations to place a co-generation facility are quite limited. Since the County has
previously stated that the lands along Loring Avenue are not available for new intense
industrial uses, this leaves limited site options for C be H and PTI to provide areas for
process modifications. The revised location, from our perspective, is superior to the original
location and eliminates this as a significant issue.
Transmission Lines
A major issue in consideration of the original site proposal was the impact of above-ground
electrical transmission lines along Loring, Winslow and Jackson Streets within the developed
portion of Crockett and across the land easterly of town which is proposed to be a part of
the Carquinez Strait Shoreline Park. The original proposal called for the lines to be above
ground. In some locations, within the County road right-of-way, existing power poles were
going to be overbuilt (made taller). This would have created a substantial visual impact on
adjacent homes.
The revised proposal is to underground the transmission lines from the project site easterly
through town and across most of the Maguire property to a location approximately 100 feet
north of Carquinez Scenic Drive where the power line would have to be above ground some
900 feet until its junction with the existing power lines network. The reason that the power
lines have not been proposed to be entirely undergrounded is the high slope of this area,
engineering factors, and severe soil erosion potential. There is a substantial additional cost
to PTI to underground the power lines as proposed; estimated at $1.5 million.
While there remain technical and engineering issues to be considered in dealing with the
transmission line, the undergrounding through town and across most of the proposed park
will minimize the long term visual impact of the aspect of the project.
Visual Impact
One of the most emotional issues dealing with this project is the visual impact to the
adjacent residents. The original proposed site placed those impacts immediately adjacent to
Loring Avenue. The reconfigured site moves those impacts from a foreground view to an
area within the C & H industrial facility. The project is hidden from view from the south by
4
the existing sugar storage bins for many of the homes that were previously impacted. It
needs to be pointed out that the relocated site does not eliminate visual intrusion of the
buildings from several homes located to the southeast of the refinery. For those impacted.,
properties, it does move the impact from the foreground to more of a background visual
impact. For those few homes, there is no way to totally eliminate this impact. The view of
the area can be softened by.fencing and landscaping the perimeter of the C & H property.
PTI has committed to our Department that this will be done and that the County can review
the landscaping plan for the site.
Views from the north will be framed by the existing sugar bins and from the C & H brick
refinery buildings to the west.
The only portions of the project not shielded by existing C be H facilities will be the exhaust
stack and the building covering the switchyard. The exhaust stack will rise 280 feet above
sea level. The bulk storage bins are approximately 180 feet above sea level, thus only a
small portion of the exhaust stack will be visible from the south. The switchyard building
will replace an existing fuel oil storage tank which will not be needed; the replacement
building which will cover the switchyard will be 10 feet lower than the existing structure.
A second visual mitigation measure which impacts visual quality was the selection of an air
cooled condenser system which will eliminate the presence of a steam plume.
Summarily, the visual impacts of the project are greatly diminished by the reconfiguration.
It should be kept in mind that the site is planned and zoned for industrial use; the continued
use or reuse of this area for industrial purposes should be anticipated to affect views from
some adjacent areas. There will continue to be several homes with impacted views.
NOLSE
The reconfiguration of the plant site will move noise generation sources further from
existing residential areas, and the noise will also be partially shielded by the existing sugar
bins. All major equipment is planned to be placed within buildings to limit noise impact.
Questions are still being raised as to whether the project meets all applicable noise
standards. The reconfiguration will partially mitigate the noise problems and staff will
continue to monitor this issue through the CEC process to ensure a quiet noise environment.
Specific remaining questions on noise revolve around the proposed air-cooled condenser. -It
is anticipated that the CEC staff analysis will provide added insight on this issue.
Other Issues Referenced in May 6th Staff Report
A new water tank off site would have been required in the original proposal to serve the
project. With an air-cooled condenser now proposed, rather than a cooling tower, the
amount of water to serve the project is greatly reduced and no new water tank is required.
The project will still require some work within County road rights-of-way for the
construction of new natural gas lines and underground transmission lines, etc. Such off-site
improvements are often required as part of development applications and can be handled
according to standard county procedures. Staff will continue to monitor these issues.
5
Construction impacts for the plant will be minimized by the PTI commitment that no
equipment requiring oversized slow moving vehicles will be delivered by truck; all such
equipment will be moved by rail or barge.
Co-Generation and C do H
The May 6th staff report points out that County staff has traditionally supported co-
generation projects and continues to do so. That report further points out that we think the
county should continue to support C do H in examining ways to become more energy
efficient. We did not make a recommendation on the sizing of the facility at that time
except to point out that the project constituted a "new small power plant." Staff did not
then, nor does it now, have the relevant information to adequately analyze this particular
issue.
The sizing issue is one best left totally to the California Energy Commission without a
county position being taken on it. The CEC has a complex process for determining the
sizing of facilities and on different tests to be met by applicants for projects. Their
decisions will be based on a statewide perspective. Staff feels the only appropriate County
role on this at this time is to monitor the CEC actions on this matter.
Remaining Staff Concerns
There are some other issues which should continue to be monitored by staff to insure that
they are handled and mitigated as appropriate. Those issues relate to:
- public health concerns
- relocation of C be H warehousing facilities on site
- air quality
- soils, seismology and geology
Staff will continue to monitor these issues and will report back to the Board if significant
issues are raised which require policy guidance. It should be restated here that the CEC
staff is going to be releasing their preliminary staff report around December 20, 1985. Staff
will be scrutinizing that report to see if new issues are presented which require the County
to take a position.
RECOMMENDATIONS
o Determine that the construction of a co-generation facility at the reconfigurated
location would conform to the County General Plan and it's implementing zoning.
o - Continue to monitor the CEC process and give a careful review to the preliminary staff
report to see if other issues surface which are of County concern.
o Indicate support for the PTI site reconfiguration and the mitigation measures com-
mitted to by PTI to the CEC to offset previously identified concerns and express a
willingness for the County to work with PTI on attempting to resolve any outstanding
issues.
o Endorse the PTI committment to our Department to landscape and fence the C & H
property adjacent to Loring Avenue and if the project is approved, work with those
companies and the community on that landscaping plan.
4e
FIGURE 1
rr
yy I
I i
� C d
.-o
C . .
.I ! 6 I tl 1
1
1 11
■ d 1
-;1
1110111
ME
IQI
_ I .
r
--ms�ss
im u�is'�AS
ti. f
VIP
f ?.i
L
JV
OF
r� - e' y�1` /,�'. �� {�._� .:' . t ;.rte /t �4:• �`Ii;.'`
No
IFVA-
4 ta4 �'rF t\ ti'e i 4t r _Y/y
ki
Te
.fie r � •7t �.•
}tV
--1,WO
t ! ��t. �` r. �b��y i',' r .*.'. J �•/ p�'.'�,1 Tom, i.�SR ��`'��'�. 4:
� - t.."fid: ' ��� �fa: �. � ��.' ,�' j xa. ,�►" "�` Y. :r.. = ,. :.
1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on December 17, 1985---, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Fanden
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT : Pacific Thermonetics Co-Generation Plant, Crockett
This being the time for the Board to consider a report
from the Director of Community Development on the Pacific
Thermonetics, Inc. proposal to build a co-generation plant at the
C&H sugar refinery in Crockett; and
Jim Cutler, Chief of Comprehensive Planning, Community
Development Department, reviewed portions of his December 13, 1985
report entitled Crockett Co-Generation Plan.
Chairwoman Fanden advised that there were members of the
community who desired to address the Board with respect to this
matter and the following persons appeared and spoke:
Barbara Denton, 136 Alexander, Crockett
Jim Samis, Jr. , Pacific Thermonetics, 1000 E1 Camino
Real, Suite 220, Menlo Park
Alan Brasesco, Crockett Improvement Association,
342 Edwards, Crockett
Ruth Blakeney, Crockett Power Plant Committee,
549 Loring Avenue, # 3, Crockett
Patricia Vargen, 11/2 Crolona Heights, Crockett
Richard Pagni , 385 Winslow, Crockett
Douglas Tubb, Crockett Power Plant Committee,
515 Winslow, Crockett
Don Christion, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association,
820 Main Street, Martinez
John Matheis, Steamfitters Union, 5023 Clayton Road,
Concord
Dan White, 160 Rolph Park Drive, Crockett
Bob Reeder, Crockett, California
Neill Pennington, C&H Sugar Company, 59 Emerald
Circle, Vallejo
Jim Samis, Sr. , Pacific Thermonetics, Inc. , 1000 E1 Camino
Menlo Park
David Nesmith, Sierra Club, 6014 College Avenue, Oakland
Supervisor Fanden commented that the Crockett area is a
low income area and there are many things needed in the community.
She suggested that tax revenues from the proposed project should be
earmarked for the use of the community, possibly through a
redevelopment agency for Crockett.
She read a list of non-project related mitigations for
the community that have been suggested by members of the community, as
well as a list of community improvement projects related to road,
capital and rehabilitation projects. She suggested that Pacific
Thermonetics pledge to fund some of the more current needs of the
community.
Supervisor Schroder objected to earmarking funds derived
from the proposed project for Crockett, and also to requiring the
developer to pay for non-project related community needs.
Supervisor Torlakson indicated support for the redevelopment
agency concept and support for the staff report submitted to the
Board members on the reconfigured project.
1
Supervisor Powers advised that he did not consider the
proposed improvements to be mitigation measures related to the pro-
posed plant, but agreed that they are needed and should be done
through some other process, suggesting that C&H and PTI may wish to
discuss ways it can come about. He recommended referring the list
to staff for suggestions on implementation.
The Board members thereupon discussed a resolution to be
sent to the California Energy Commission with respect to the Pacific
Therometics proposal to build a co-generation facility in Crockett
and after much discussion, adopted Resolution 85/735.
Supervisor Fanden then requested that the Board consider the
concerns and possible ways of meeting the needs of the community of
Crockett and explore the concept of a redevelopment agency for
Crockett .
Supervisor Powers suggested that the proposed community
improvements, a redevelopment agency and disucssion with the cor-
porate community in Crockett be referred to staff for development of
a process whereby those issues can be addressed.
Jim Samis, Sr. commented that his company would be pleased
to fund a study, if that is what it takes, for setting up an entity
to allow the money his plant will pay in taxes to remain in the
community of Crockett.
Following discussion with Chairwoman Fanden, Mr. Samis
suggested that his company, at the time his plant is certified and
the permit is issued, would place $200 ,000 under the control of the
County, part of said sum to be used for the feasibility study for a
redevelopment agency and the remainder for improvements and needs in
the community.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED THAT the proposed community
improvements, consideration of a possible redevelopment agency and
any required feasibility study therefor, and the offer of Pacific
Thermonetics, Inc. to place $200,000 under the control of the
County for funding a study and for providing certain community
improvements are REFERRED to the Director of Community Development.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Director of Community
Development is REQUESTED to work with both the the corporate and
private communities in Crockett in addressing the community' s needs.
I hereby certity that this Is a tMG andcArmct C*Py of
an action taken and ontered on Bae minutes of the
Board of SupervisE=4ff
ATTESTED: -.h -r-
PHiL BATCHELOR,Clork of the BoSrd
of Supervisors and County Administrator
cc: Community Development 13Y U
County Administrator
County Counsel
Pacific Thermonetics, Inc.
C& H Sugar Company
Crockett Power Plant Committee
Crocket Improvement Association
2