Benicia, county to study industrial park’s economic future

Repost from the Fairfield Daily Reporter

Benicia, county to study industrial park’s economic future

By Todd R. Hansen, March 09, 2016
The Valero refinery in operation in Benicia’s Industrial Park. (Daily Republic file)

FAIRFIELD — Smoke stacks and refinery buildings rise up from what was once a military arsenal site, and five decades later, the evolution of what is now the Benicia Industrial Park continues.

“Our industrial park is quite old,” said Jasmin Powell, president of the Benicia Industrial Park Association and head of operations at Dunlop Manufacturing, which has been at the park since 1972.

“So some of the issues that we have been bringing up (as an association) is higher-speed Internet access, which has gotten better over the last couple of years,” Powell said in a phone interview Tuesday. “And our roads are in need of repair.”

The Solano County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved a letter of intent for a Collaborative Economic Development Initiative with Benicia, which could eventually create a redevelopment-style district to finance infrastructure improvements at the industrial park.

The city approved the initiative Feb. 23 and has earmarked $25,000 for a feasibility study that will likely come back to the City Council in June or July, Mario Giuliani, the Benicia Economic Development manager, said in a phone interview Monday.

The central focus of the study is the potential value of establishing an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District to use property tax increments toward improving and building infrastructure at the industrial park.

“Essentially it is another tool . . . for the city to utilize to try to get financing into the industrial park,” Giuliani said. “It is probably the one (option) we are focusing on the most, but that’s not to say that when we do our feasibility study there won’t be other (financing) options.”

In essence, the city would be taking its share of increased property tax in the district area and investing it toward infrastructure. Unlike the defunct redevelopment system, that property does not have to be considered blighted.

Benicia receives 24 cents on each dollar of property tax, money that is typically spread across all general fund uses that include police, fire and city administration, as well as parks and recreation.

Giuliani said one of the things the feasibility study will address is the impact – if any – the loss of tax increments would have on other city services. However, the ultimate goal is that the improvements made would generate even greater tax revenue for all of those services.

“That is a policy decision the City Council will have to make,” Giuliani said.

Also to be determined is whether the county would appropriate its share of the property tax from within the district toward the infrastructure improvements.

Supervisor Linda Seifert, who represents the area, said she will wait and see what the feasibility study shows before deciding what role she would lobby the county to take – including funding options.

“I do have an interest in the county doing what it can to improve (the industrial park),” Seifert said Monday.

Powell said the association has not been part of the city-county discussions, but she was aware such talks were taking place.

On the same night the Benicia council approved the development initiative with the county, it conducted a workshop on a proposed 547-acre mixed-use development within the industrial park.

The Northern Gateway Project, proposed by the Shorts Development Group, targets the same area of the failed Seeno project several years ago. The Shorts Group has a purchasing option on the property. Like the Seeno project, the new proposal does include a residential element.

Seifert said she would not base her decision about county financial support on a specific project, decisions about which she said should be left up to the city and its residents.

The port-oriented industrial park is comprised of 3,000 acres and 7 million square feet of developed space near the junction of Interstates 680 and 780, according to the city’s Office of Economic Development. The park has 450 businesses that employ 6,500 people.

Powell said the park has lost companies because of infrastructure problems, noting specifically Internet access. The city provided about $750,000 for broadband installation in its 2012 budget, and approved $625,000 in a grant/loan program to help park businesses upgrade equipment and buildings.

The law establishing the Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District was signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in September 2014 and went into effect Jan. 1, 2015. It does not include school district shares of property tax.

Reach Todd R. Hansen at 427-6936 or thansen@dailyrepublic.net.

This version updates the original to reflect action taken Tuesday by the Board of Supervisors.

Derailment: Should rail tracks have fence sensors in landslide prone Niles Canyon?

Repost from the Contra Costa Times

Derailment: Should rail tracks have fence sensors in landslide prone Niles Canyon?

By Matthias Gafni, Sam Richards and Thomas Peele, 03/08/2016 07:09:45 PM PST

SUNOL — A deep stretch of Niles Canyon where a crowded commuter train from San Jose derailed Monday night is fraught with landslides, yet it lacks a system to alert engineers that their path may be blocked by mud or toppled trees.

But officials — who called it an “absolute miracle” no one was killed — said that may change.

Altamont Commuter Express Spokesman Brian Schmidt said the transit agency, which resumes service Wednesday, will talk with track owner Union Pacific about installing fencing in the area with sensors that set off alerts when hit by trees, mudslides or falling rocks. That is similar to what has been done along the Feather River Canyon in northeastern California and in western Colorado. The sensors have been available but are not widely used, and there are none in the slide-prone Niles Canyon.

An ACE commuter train car that derailed lies in the Alameda Creek along Niles Canyon Road, in Sunol, Calif., Tuesday, March 8, 2016. Authorities said that
An ACE commuter train car that derailed lies in the Alameda Creek along Niles Canyon Road, in Sunol, Calif., Tuesday, March 8, 2016. Authorities said that nine of the more than 200 passengers on the Stockton-bound train were injured, four seriously. (Anda Chu/Bay Area News Group) ( ANDA CHU )

“If there’s any place in the Bay Area to have a landslide, Niles Canyon is it,” said Jonathan Stock, a USGS geologist who has studied the area. “It has a long history of things going bump in the night.”

The first two cars of ACE train No. 10, with 196 passengers aboard, derailed between Sunol and Fremont around 7:15 p.m. Monday, with the lead car tumbling into rain-swollen Alameda Creek. As water filled the partially submerged car, passengers frantically worked to free injured riders.

Nine people were injured. Four of the injuries were serious, though not life-threatening, and one patient — a 24-year-old man — remained hospitalized Tuesday in good condition.

Using two cranes, crews started pulling the submerged lead car out of the creek on Tuesday afternoon, while the other four cars were moved down the track.

Federal Railroad Administration investigators, as well as those from the California Public Utilities Commission and track owner Union Pacific, are involved in the investigation. It was unclear Tuesday whether the landslide broadsided the train as it rolled past at 35 mph, in the 40 mph zone, or if the slide happened beforehand and the train crashed directly into the debris. Other trains went through the canyon earlier Monday and apparently did not report problems.

Christopher Chow, a PUC spokesman, said the agency sent two inspectors to the scene Monday night, and they remained on-site late Tuesday.

“Their focus is on identifying the root cause of the incident and collecting evidence to determine if there were any violations by ACE,” Chow said. “As part of the investigation, we will be reviewing relevant records, including our last inspection of the track.”

FRA accident data identifies 325 train derailments in California between 2011 and 2015. All but eight involved freight trains. Three people were injured, data show. There were no fatalities.

Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty, a member of the ACE board, agreed it’s time to talk about installing slide fences with sensors.

“One thing we can’t ignore is technology, and we have to continue to look at what’s available, and use what’s appropriate,” Haggerty said Tuesday.

Stock reviewed photos of the hillside above the crash site and said it appeared that the unnaturally steep slope created when the line was built, aided by heavy rain, caused the debris flow and tree fall that investigators say likely caused the train to derail.

“That’s an old cut from when it was blasted for the railroad to go through,” said Stock. “It appears to be a small, thin failure off a modified piece of landscape.”

With tracks historically built on the flattest possible ground, often near rivers in valleys and canyons alongside steep hills, “washouts” in the industry are fairly common, said Gus Ubaldi, an Ohio-based engineer who specializes in railroads.

Even with frequent inspections, washouts are nearly impossible to predict, and “can happen in an instant. It’s an act of God,” he said.

Union Pacific inspects its track through Niles Canyon at least twice weekly, Schmidt said, with additional inspections done when storms, earthquakes or other weather- or geology-related events occur, as required by federal regulations. Locomotive engineers operating freight and passenger trains through the canyon also keep an eye out for any slide potential, Schmidt added. In addition, state and federal regulations require regular vegetation maintenance.

The decision to halt service can be made if a storm is deemed a threat to train crew or passenger safety. All UP tracks in California are subject to a “very robust” inspection process, and the tracks had gone through an additional “stormwatch” inspection just ahead of this weekend’s rainstorms, said Francisco Castillo, a Union Pacific spokesman.

Because there were no other slides reported from the recent storms — the area received about 2.13 inches of rain since March 1, according to the National Weather Service — Stock speculated that the ground movement started from a saturated tree falling, pulling debris down onto the tracks with it. An Alameda County sheriff’s deputy said the smell of eucalyptus, a tree prone to fall during landslides, was overwhelming at the scene Monday night. He also saw the tracks littered with shards of tree branches.

Whatever brought the hillside down was not unusual for the area.

Stock said he’s found at least five newspaper articles on major slides since the 1860s impacting rail traffic. In December, the Alameda County Public Works department issued a study concluding “the entire Niles Canyon corridor is notorious for rockslides and landslides, which often activate during rainfall or seismic events.” A 2004 California Geological Survey study reached the same conclusion.

The Pacific Locomotive Association, which runs the six-mile historical Niles Canyon Railway on the north side of the canyon, fights mudslides and related issues every few years. The most recent was on Christmas Eve 2013, said President Henry Baum; the mudslide didn’t cover the rails but diverted water runoff that undermined the track and closed it temporarily.

“We spend a lot of time and money cleaning up small slides making sure they don’t turn into big ones,” he said.

The only landslide in Niles Canyon that Schmidt said he could remember since ACE started operations in October 1998 was a small one several years ago encountered by a Union Pacific freight train. That train did not derail, he said.

Many years before ACE started operations, a landslide damaged a part of the current-day ACE line alongside Old Altamont Pass Road about a mile west of the old Altamont summit. That resulted in a “shoofly” built around the slide area, a little curve in the track that became permanent.

Hearing on Phillips 66 oil-by-rail plan continues Friday in San Luis Obispo

Repost from The Tribune, San Luis Obispo

Hearing on Phillips 66 oil-by-rail plan continues Friday in San Luis Obispo

HIGHLIGHTS
• The county Planning Commission holds a 4th day of public testimony on a proposal to bring crude oil by rail to the Nipomo refinery

•  Most of the four dozen speakers commenting Friday morning support the project; many coming from Southern California
•  As of 10:30 a.m. nearly 100 people were waiting to speak to the commission

By Cynthia Lambert, March 11, 2016 11:26 AM
The San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission on Friday, during a fourth day of a hearing on a proposal by Phillips 66 Co. to bring oil by rail to its Nipomo Mesa refinery.
The San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission on Friday, during a fourth day of a hearing on a proposal by Phillips 66 Co. to bring oil by rail to its Nipomo Mesa refinery. David Middlecamp

More than four dozen speakers, most of them in support of the Phillips 66 oil-by-rail plan, shared their views with San Luis Obispo County Planning Commissioners on Friday morning in the fourth day of a hearing on the controversial proposal that has drawn statewide attention.

Planning Commission Chairman Don Campbell said he hoped the board could wrap up public comment Friday, adding: “We aren’t getting a lot of new information. We’re getting a lot of the same information, just different people.”

The county planning staff said at 10:30 a.m. they still had a stack of 94 speaker cards. About 50 people had already commented at that point in the morning.

Phillips 66 has applied to San Luis Obispo County to build a 1.3-mile rail spur with five parallel tracks from the main rail line to its Nipomo Mesa refinery, an unloading facility at the refinery and on-site pipelines. In three previous days of hearings, hundreds of people from around the state packed the meeting room, many condemning the proposal out of fears that an oil train derailment anywhere along the route would be disastrous. Supporters at previous meetings, many of them Phillips 66 employees, had defended the proposal, pointing to the refinery’s good safety record and the jobs it provides.

On Friday morning, many of those who commented before the commission’s morning break said they traveled to San Luis Obispo County early in the morning from Southern California to support Phillips 66 and United Steelworkers members.

Some said they were affiliated with the South Bay Center for Community Development, based in Wilmington, which has partnered with the union and the refinery to provide job opportunities for the community.

Phillips 66’s Los Angeles refinery comprises two facilities in Carson and Wilmington.

“We’re talking about directly benefiting 200 households, providing jobs for these people,” said Noel Genuino, who works for the nonprofit organization and was wearing a United Steelworkers shirt.

Cal Poly student Paul Sullivan, a computer science master’s student, also spoke in support.

“I think that any jobs we can find, especially in this area, is something we really need to work for,” he said. “I think that the environmental (impacts) and danger of the project is definitely overstated and a lot of students agree with me.”

The few speakers in opposition on Friday included Grover Beach City Councilwoman Miriam Shah, who said that blocking the project “may very well be our last chance to control the rail lines that run through the coast.”

“I can’t see a reason to put any more pollution into the environment and into their lungs,” she said.

The board of supervisors’ chambers, where the meeting is taking place, was full Friday morning, with many opponents and supporters in the room. But many of the opponents have already given their comments to the commission.

More than 300 people have spoken in front of the commission in three previous hearings. Most of the 200 speakers during the first two days, Feb. 4 and 5, urged the panel to reject the project, while many of the 100 speakers on the third day of the hearing, supported the plan.

The county planning staff has recommended denial of the project, which as proposed would allow five trains a week, for a maximum of 250 trains per year to deliver crude oil to the refinery.

Each train would have three locomotives, two buffer cars and 80 railcars carrying a total of about 2.2 million gallons of crude oil, according to county planners.

During a previous hearing day, representatives from Phillips 66 urged the commissioners to approve an alternate plan to allow three trains a week instead of five, or a maximum of 150 trains a year.

The county staff report states that three trains a week — or 150 a year — would reduce the significant toxic air emissions to no longer be considered a “Class 1 significant impact” at the refinery, which refers to the highest level of negative impacts referenced in the project’s final environmental impact report.

But emissions of diesel particulate matter would still remain a “Class 1” impact on-site, according to the staff report, and there would still be 10 “Class 1” impacts along the main rail line, such as impacts to air quality, water resources, potential demands on emergency response services and an increased risk to the public in the event of a derailment.

Chair of Benicia Planning Commission to speak at March 15 City Council meeting

By Roger Straw, February 12, 2016

Commission votes to send a representative, will get 15 minutes

At its meeting on March 10, the Benicia Planning Commission was granted 15 minutes to present its case at the March 15 City Council meeting. Chair Don Dean will represent the Commission.

This would seem to be an adjustment in the agenda.

Previously, the public notice on the March 15 hearing stated that “Staff presentations and Valero presentations will take place on March 15, 2015.”  An email from the City confirmed that “The City and Valero will present at the Council’s March 15 meeting.”  The City’s website says “The City Council will open the hearing on the appeal on March 15, 2016 for Staff and Applicant presentations. ”

The appearance to the public was that staff, in full support of Valero’s proposal and in opposition to the Planning Commission’s denial of the project, was engineering a pro-Valero opening night at City Council, giving voice ONLY to itself and Valero.  This may not have been the case.

The Planning Commission had not taken formal action to name a representative to speak at the hearings until last night. So it may have been due to an abundance of procedural caution that the City failed to name the Commission as a presenter on the 15th.

At any rate, it is a welcome bit of news that Chair Dean will be allowed to speak on that first night of hearings.  It is only right that the Commission’s views get a hearing as Council members’ deliberate.

For safe and healthy communities…