Outcry ignites over hazardous-materials plan Outcry ignites over hazardous-materials plan (October 20, 2004)

** Plan would streamline process for businesses to get hazardous-materials permits.

By Rebecca Wallace
Almanac Staff Writer

The phrase "hazardous materials" can be quite a catalyst.

It was at a Menlo Park Planning Commission meeting on October 11. Worried about dangerous matter near their homes, Menlo Park and East Palo Alto residents decried a proposal to make it easier for businesses to get approval for the use of hazardous materials in the M-2 light industrial area.

The commission ended up voting unanimously to advise the City Council not to adopt the proposal. But the council could still do so. It's tentatively scheduled to take up the matter November 16.

The proposal is part of a city effort to streamline the permit process. It would allow businesses to use hazardous materials without going through a public hearing to get a permit from the Planning Commission, which is now required.

The businesses would still need the nod from city staff and agencies, including the Menlo Park Fire Protection District and the San Mateo County Environmental Health Division.

Property owners and residents within 300 feet would still be notified when a business seeks a hazardous-materials approval.

Resident reaction

"If they vote it in, we probably will have to live with it. We might be fine -- until we get something catastrophic," Margaret Fruth, one of about 20 meeting attendees worried about the plan, told the Almanac.

Ms. Fruth lives on Peggy Lane near the M-2 area, which has property in the area of Bayfront Expressway, U.S. 101 and Willow Road. Menlo Park's Belle Haven, Lorelei Manor, Suburban Park and Flood Triangle neighborhoods are nearby.

Ms. Fruth regularly attends Planning Commission meetings when hazardous-materials matters are on the agenda. She says that while commissioners might feel individual projects are acceptable, they should look more closely at the cumulative effect of many projects.

"For me, 'toxic' has a face," she said. "My husband died of cancer in May, and I suspect that it may have been tied to something in the environment."

Business friendly

The proposal came out of the business-development program created by the City Council last year to encourage more sales tax revenue by making Menlo Park more "business-friendly."

Planning staff and business development manager David Johnson came up with several possible areas for streamlining, including hazardous-material regulation. For example, El Camino Real and downtown restaurants wanting to add outdoor seating or sell alcohol would no longer need to go through the Planning Commission.

The commission recommended approval of these and some other steps, but the hazardous-materials plan seems headed for a bumpier path.

'City of strangers'

The day after the meeting, Planning Commissioner Matt Henry appeared before council members to urge them not to approve the plan.

Mr. Henry, a Belle Haven resident, said the proposal shows "a profound lack of awareness and sensitivity" to residents living near the M-2 area.

"It's like we're a city of strangers," he said.

Recent Planning Commission approvals for hazardous materials included permits for an O'Brien Drive therapeutics company installing a 3,000-gallon liquid nitrogen tank, and a Bohannon Drive health-care company with a 3,000-gallen oxygen tank. Both votes were unanimous.

Appeal process

Under the staff proposal, residents would still be able to appeal hazardous-materials approvals to the Planning Commission, but Commissioner Kelly Fergusson said after the meeting that this isn't enough.

"The proposal would have taken away people's voices ... and would have put working families in a position where they would have had to work with a cumbersome bureaucracy to appeal," she said.

Commissioner Lorie Sinnott said she might have supported eliminating the Planning Commission requirement because of the "extensive research" done by city and agency officials. But, she added, the meeting's high emotion made her vote the other way.

"With this much upset in the neighborhood, this is not worth pushing through," she said. "The public still feels more comfortable being able to comment; that in itself has got a value."

Both Ms. Fergusson and Ms. Sinnott are running for the City Council this fall.

Councilwoman Mickie Winkler said she hadn't been following the issue closely, but that there is probably more need for public outreach beforehand if the council does decide to approve the proposal.

"I'm interested in knowing whether anybody shows up at these public hearings (to grant permits for hazardous materials), and if we can have public hearings and still streamline the process," she said.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.