HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11141995 - SD8 1
5D,
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ` on`ra
Costa
FROM: VAL ALEXEEFF, DIRECTOR OF GMEDA `s
: �
MARK FINUCANE, DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES �d.., County
DATE : November 14, 1995
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE AD-HOC COMMITTEE ON RESIDENTIAL/INDUSTRIAL INTERFACE
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 . Accept this report from the Community Development and
Health Services Department Directors regarding the
progress of the Ad-Hoc Committee.
2 . Direct staff to return to the Board in February with the
committee' s preliminary report.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Committee ' s efforts are funded by a $25, 000 contribution from
Wickland Oil Company. Additional information on the budget is
provided in the Background section of this report.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee was charged with developing an interface policy to
address the separation of industry and residences . The Committee
was to assess whether (and how) Risk Management and Prevention
Program (RMPP) information could be used in the land use planning
process . The committee has sixteen members representing diverse
interests, who were appointed during the months of May throuqjh
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: XX YES SIGNATURE
7L�" R
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE (S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON 1"A j Ig9.S APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _,X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
/ I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
✓ UNANIMOUS (ABSENT gL TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Catherine Kutsuris (510/646-2036) ATTESTED -! ltz,. 4,1ja, 14, /� 9
cc: Community Development PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK O
Val Alexeeff, Director GMEDA THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Health Services : E. Blake AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Ad-Hoc Committee Members (via CDD)
BY A AC , DEPUTY
ck1\drb\adhoc2.bo
Ad-Hoc Committee
November 14, 1995
Page Two
October, 1995. It is staffed by the Community Development and
Health Services Departments. The committee has held three meetings
and two subcommittee meetings, though the September meeting was
just short of a quorum. The life of the committee was originally
estimated to be about six months, but the complexity of the issue,
the absence of model policies on the topic, the diversity of
interests, and the addition of members after the initial meeting
resulted in the need for additional time.
1 . Committee Activities :
A. Review of current information: The Committee
reviewed available data sources (e.g. the Risk
Management and Prevention Program data) , the land
use planning process (general plan, zoning) , and
available vehicles for addressing the land use
issue (e.g. zoning code amendments, Board policy) .
The committee also reviewed the proposed revisions
to the "Hazardous Materials" Ordinance (County Code
Chapter 84-63) .
B. Applicability of RMPP Data: The Committee has
concluded that Risk Management and Prevention
Program (RMPP) information, including the off-site
consequence analysis, should not be the basis for
changes to the County General Plan, the denial of
subdivisions, or the denial of land use permits . A
copy of the staff report which was the basis for
this decision is included as Attachment A. The
Committee left open the possibility that the RMPP
information may be useful in combination with some
other data.
C. Current Options Under Consideration: The Committee
has discussed the possibility of proposing an
overlay district for areas adjacent to industry. A
series of criteria or recommendations would be
provided to assist in the review of projects within
these "zones . "
At the September meeting, several members took on
the task of drafting their ideas concerning buffer
zones, making industry safer, changes to the
Initial Study Checklist which is used as part of
the CEQA process, and public notification for
properties adjacent to industrial uses.
D. Public Workshops : The Board Order which
established the committee specified that three
public workshops should be held. The committee
decided to hold the workshops after the members had
developed some preliminary recommendations or
options for public comment. A subcommittee has
proposed an extensive public outreach campaign
(refer to Attachment B) which will be considered at
the next committee meeting.
Ad-Hoc Committee
November 14, 1995
Page Three
2 . Committee Work Schedule and Budget:
Staff believes that the committee will require several
more meetings to develop draft options or
recommendations. The budget allocated for the project is
$25, 000 divided between the Community Development and
Health Services Departments. Both departments have
incurred approximately $9500 . 00 in costs to date. The
staff and the committee will strive to maintain an
efficient schedule so that the work can be concluded
within the budget limit. Because of the holiday season,
we estimate that the preliminary report could be
completed and submitted to the Board by February, 1996.
Following the Board' s review, the committee would conduct
public workshops, and prepare a final report for the
Board' s consideration.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
TO: AD-HOC COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRIAL/ DATE: August 21, 1995
RESIDENTIAL INTERFACE
FROM: Catherine Kutsuris
Senior Planner
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM#6: PROBLEM STATEMENT AND DATA SOURCES
Following the Board's decision on the Point Crockett Project and the decision to create this
committee, the staff of the Health Services and Community Development Departments agreed that
the following statement adequately summarizes the issue to be evaluated by the committee.
INDUSTRIAL/RESIDENTIAL PROBLEM STATEMENT
RiskManagement and Prevention Program, Air Toxic Hot Spot data and other information
related to the use and storage of hazardous materials are available to the public. Can this
information be used in land use planning to provide greater public health and safety
protection? If so, how?
This memorandum attempts to critically evaluate the RMPP data, and whether it can and should be
used to guide land use decisions. This report utilizes the information which the Health Department
provided to the committee in the first two meetings and provides a planning agency's perspective of
its applicability to land use. The Health Department has reviewed this report and has concurred with
the recommendations.
The purpose of this analysis is to systematically evaluate how and whether the data can be used. If
the data sources are found to be problematic for the purposes of land use planning, this finding should
not be interpreted as the end of the exercise. We could then search for other information or criteria
from which to make rational land use planning decisions. In addition, you should.consider the
possibility that changes to other regulatory programs (other than land use) would be appropriate and
effective actions to improve public health and safety. This may be of particular importance in our
County since many of the RMPP zones are already developed and changes in land use policy or
regulations may have little impact.
A. RISK MANAGEMENT AND PREVENTION PROGRAM DATA OVERVIEW:
At the first committee meeting,Laura Brown from the Health Services Department presented
an overview of the Risk Management and Prevention Program (RMPP). A summary of the
RMPP program, which was prepared by the Health Department, has been included as
Attachment A.
Important elements of the RMPP effort relative to this committee's discussion are:
■ The goal of the RMPP program is to reduce accidents involving acutely hazardous
materials. The RMPP program was designed to reduce the risk of an accident by
conducting detailed analyses of the process, the materials, and the policies and
procedures which might affect the potential for an upset event at a facility.
■ The RMPP Program has led to substantial reductions in the amount of acutely
hazardous materials handled at facilities since the start of the program. Facilities are
installing second and third levels of safeguards, improving their policies and
procedures, and increasing their mechanical inspections.
■ The Off-Site Consequence Analysis portion of the RMPP models worst case credible
release scenarios with pessimistic weather conditions. The result of this analysis is the
mapping of isopleths which utilize predominate wind direction.
■ The Off-Site Consequence Analysis identifies two zones, the "Protection Action
Zone" and the "Notification Zone." The "Protective Action Zone identifies areas
where serious personal injury could occur if a person were exposed to an Acutely
Hazardous Material (AHM) for more than one hour. Shelter-in-place or evacuation
would be recommended, depending on the nature and length of time of the release.
The circles which were plotted on the County Land Use Map reflect the
Protective Action Zone isopleths.
The "Notification Zone" identifies areas where an individual would not experience
serious or long-term health effects, but he or she may experience eye irritation or
other symptoms. Shelter-in-place would likely be the recommended response for
individuals within the Notification Zone, which is much larger than the Protective
Action Zone.
B. APPLICATION OF RISK MANAGEMENT AND PREVENTION PROGRAM DATA:
The RMPP plumes were overlayed on a County General Plan land use map. This map was
displayed at the first meeting, and will be brought to this meeting as well. The circles drawn
encompass a large portion of the developed lands within the County.
Contra Costa County's RMPP program is, along with Los Angeles County, one of the most
aggressive programs in the State. The program is considered extremely successful in its
efforts to the reduce the risk and severity of accidents. This success is due to the cooperative
efforts of the County and the participating industries. There are many counties that have yet
to implement an RMPP program. Although this translates to increased safety within our
County, it also means that we have been unable to locate any agencies which have attempted
to use this program information for other purposes (e.g. land use decisions).
The difficulties apparent in attempting to use RNIPP data to make land use policy, use
designation or regulatory changes are:
1. The zones which result from the studies do not represent the entire risk posed
by a facility.
The off-site consequence analysis is limited to acutely hazardous materials. Other
materials present at a facility could cause an off-site event. The analysis does not
include fires/explosions, and does not evaluate chronic exposure. According to the
Health Services Department.it is not possible to quantitatively or qualitative) assign
the entire risk of a facility based on the existing data.
2. The RMPP program does not include off-site consequence analysis for all
facilities which use acutely hazardous materials.
Off-site consequence analyses have been submitted to the Health Services Department
for a limited number of facilities. The Health Department conducts a detailed
verification of the analyses and, as should be expected, not all submitted off-site
consequence analyses have been evaluated.
3. The methodology for conducting the off-site consequence analysis is subject to
change.
The Health Services Department uses the Emergency Response Planning Guidelines
to quantify the consequence level. Work is underway at both the state and federal
level which may result in the establishment of different levels of concern which may
change the consequences identified in the current program. The California
Environmental Protection Agency and the National Academy of Sciences are
suggesting potentially more conservative guidelines for the preparation of RMPPs
which would result in larger plumes. In addition, the U.S. EPA is planning to require
the inclusion of a "worst case" analysis which the Health Department believes is
unrealistic, and which will substantially increase the size of the RMPP zones.
4. Changes in business practices alter the sizes of the zones.
Changes in the use of acutely hazardous materials at individual sites would change the
locations and/or the size of the isopleths creating a fluctuating data source. These
changes would generally occur without any public agency approval and, in many
cases without public agency knowledge..
5. The data does not identify the isopleths created by facilities beyond the
County's borders.
Based on the size of the isopleths, it is reasonable to assume that facilities in Solano
County(e.g. Exxon Refinery),Alameda County, and San Joaquin County might have
isopleths that would extend into our County. Any program to use RMPP
information generAted in our County must also include information from other
counties which affects properties within our borders. That information must be
similar in terms of the level of analysis and the justification for the findings.
6. The existing isopleths cover much of the urbanized area of our county.
The isopleths currently encompass large areas of the County including Richmond, San
Pablo, El Cerrito, Rodeo, Crockett, Hercules, Martinez, Concord, Bay Point,
Pittsburg, Antioch, Oakley, and Discovery Bay. With the adoption of more
conservative guidelines, the isopleths may encompass the majority of the urbanized
land in the western, north central and eastern portions of our County.
C. RECOMMENDATIONS:
The RMPP program has led to substantial reductions in the amount of acutely hazardous
materials handled, increases in mechanical inspections, expanded safeguards and improved
procedures. The program is considered very successful in acheiving its purpose.
As detailed above, there are numerous reasons which individually would lead to the
conclusion that the use of RMPP data for broad land use planning is not supportable. Since
there were several apparent issues,this report did not attempt to include all of the difficulties
in attempting utilize the program data for a new purpose. Other issues would include:
■ the ability to base land use decisions on data which has been developed with
trade secret information;
■ the risk to the RMPP program and the participation of industry.
Even if the data issues presented above could be resolved, we are left with the reality that the
isopleths cover(or potentially will cover)most of the urbanized area in the west, north central
and eastern portions of our County. Changes in land use designations to restrict or prohibit
development within the RMPP zones are unrealistic.
Recommendations:
1. Based on the limitations of the RMPP data for land use planning purposes identified
herein, concur that it is not appropriate to use RMPP data at this time as the basis
for changing the land use designations of properties, denying the subdivision of land
or denying various uses of land currently allowed by the code.
2. Discuss at your next meeting whether there are any other opportunities to use the
RMPP data in land use planning(e.g. restrictions on how a use may occur rather
than on "can"it occur).
3. Request staff to provide information on Air Toxic Hot Spot data and any other data
sources the committee believes would be relevant to this review.
If you have any questions prior to the meeting,please feel free to call either Elinor Blake at 3 13-5022
or my office at 646-2036.
CKl\drb\adhoc3.mem
vdiandocs\adhoc3.mem
Minutes, September 13, 1995
Outreach Subcommittee
Ad Hoc Committee on Industrial/Residential Interface
Present: Dorothy Oda, Tom Lindemuth, Tom Zimmerman, Suzanne
Teran, Jim Cutler, Elifior Blake
The subcommittee reviewed outreach decisions made at the last
Committee meeting. These included:
o the forums will put forward for comment recommendations
or policy options;
o the forums will occur in November;
o the forums might be held in .Rodeo/Crockett and Bay
Point, since the Committee included representatives
from Richmond and Oakley (i.e. , to get feedback from
other areas) . The Committee did agree, though, that
the Los Medanos campus is a known and convenient
location in East County.
The subcommittee agreed that the group's intent is to integrate
or address any public comments in the Committee's recommendations
to the Board.
Outreach messages
The subcommittee discussed ways involve the public in the policy
discussion. To communicate the immediacy and importance of the
issue to residents and other interested parties, a number of
ideas of ideas were generated:
o remind people of the issues that arose concerning Pointe
Crockett
o use, "Homeowners - attention! " or "Future homeowners"
o use a map or aerial photo, possibly localized for each
of the three forums
o use a map to show population growth projections
o note redevelopment issues where appropriate
o note environmental justice issues where appropriate
o note agricultural chemicals issues
o note quality of life issues re: commuting, increased
pollution
It was noted that these last two are beyond the scope of the Ad
Hoc Committee's task.
The group agreed that emphasizing local concerns would help gain
people's notice. The subcommittee also wanted the message to
stay positive.
Outreach methods
In addition to outreach options listed in a memo to the full
Committee, the subcommittee enumerated the following:
o letters to the editor
o guest editorial/op ed piece
o editorials by the newspaper
o public notice ad
o cable TV: PSA; cards; news stories; taping of a panel
discussion
o press release [request assistance from HSD's Julie
Freestone]
o feature news stories in all area papers
o presentations to the MACS
o fliers, potentially tailored to each of the 3 areas
o mailing lists: PEHAB, HMC, Planning Commission, others?
0 outreach to ethnic groups thru organizations (Mr.
Zimmerman offered Spanish translation]
o libraries
o E-mail/Internet announcement
o Word of mouth, starting with the above groups - ask
members to actively announce and talk up the forums
It was noted with regard to the fact sheet idea that in order to
write it, the full Committee needs to agree on what the questions
are, and what the answers are.
Interested parties
The subcommittee generated the list below.
o home loan lenders
o insurers
o religious centers (churches etc. )
o residents
o neighborhood associations
o community development groups
o emergency responders
o the public health constituency - providers, health
insurers, PEHAB constituent groups, interested ethnic
associations, et al.
o environmental organizations
o MACs
o Community Advisory Panels to industry
o League of Women Voters
o realtors
Outreach "message"
Based on discussions from which the above lists were developed,
the group agreed to a rough framing of the question before the
forums. This framing was not further discussed, and will be a
topic of the next subcommittee meeting.
"As Contra Costa County grows in population, more housing and
other facilities are being developed near industrial sites. How
can we insure continued residential, business and industrial
growth that provides for safe and liveable communities? We need
to examine and consider updating our policies. "
• The subcommittee agreed to meet again at 1:00 prior to the full
Committee meeting on September 25th and discuss the following:
o locations of forums
o criteria/nature
o timeframe options
o review the basic outreach message.