The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHelena Storage Facility1~ ~ is BOAR[) OF SiIPER-fl50RS 1 -~ ~2 ~ G ~ - c~ ~: ~ ~ ri DEC -p.~'~Oii oRav~u~, cAUi=a~ntiA Steve Troester November ~0, 2011 Department of Develop.rrient Services: . 7.County Center Drive ' Oroville, GA 95965 Reference: Helena Storage Facility in Nelson Dear Mr. Troester The 3.H. McKnight Ranch, a family corporation, was the previous owner of the property bordering.;the north. an,d'east of the;Hele,na property in,Ne~lson. The: IVlclCn~ght_famiJy,~farmed `phis iocatin for over 90 years. The Helena property was previously a dairy; beef feedlot and horrte site until purchased by the J.H. McKnight Ranch in the early 1970's. Farming around this parcel for mare than 45 years was not detrimental to our growing of wheat and in later years -rice, no more than was farming around the McKnight headquarters with fertilizer and fuel storage tanks; grain storage bins and 80' tall elevators. Ag aircraft has serviced the planting of rice aro.urid this parcel since 195Q with no problems. Qrgartic anci.seed fields bortlering the west and south of us did not hinderfhe application, by air, of fertilizer, seed,, herbicides or pesticides on an.y ;af the McKnight Ranch. - The McKnight Ranch extended the Level of the Dry Creek levies to a height making the flooding of the McKnight Ranch a past problem. Any previous flooding was before the levy..was censtructed, and ~ifthis levee is maintained it offers-very little flooding risk. Trucking harvested rice to our dryer; hoofing fertilizer anef.other.farmingneeds by trucks did riot cause infrastructure degradation in the past. Overweight loads of green rice hauled to dryers offsite would cause more damage than legal weight loads of farm'supplies from the Helena cdmplex. J.H'. McKnight Ranch sold this: property to Helena in lVlarch of 2010 at the sanction of Butte County officials and in support of the counties' Supervisors desire to mo~e,Ag>celated .enterprises to more rural areas to reduce risk and pressure off outlying urban areas. Central location of this facility cEose to farm land users, is a. positive for the farmer aild also offers possible. economic benefits to diem. This complex would enhance the delivery of farm inputs, rathEr than risk the termirtationof farming in fihe area. Respectfully, s~G2GC!Ljl ~..j Donald-Murphy, Maraa(ger: .l.K: McKnight Ranch, lic ce: Butte: County Super visors .Lambert, Kirk, Wahl, Yamaguchi and Connelly ~. ~ QCT~2 08: ~3A FROM: R~IDEf2847N ORf~~hE 5308681677 TQ: 6741365 P, ~ Bilal~~h.i Fa~rm~s .Physical address ~ Mailing addlress 1134 Nelson ~Ld PO Box 1216 Neisan, CA 95974 Durham, CA 959$ ," Steve Troester, Senior Planner '~ %-~''.':`~ ::: _ "B,utte Cotuity D.DS •7` CQUniy ~C`extex~.Dz~Ye Oraville, CA 95965 RE: UP~O-{1003 anti LLA11-~OflOi {HELENA C.gEMICA~,); Notice of Fxcparation of ELR and asl~ng for pablic impact to help" de~e the scope of the Ia~R, Dear Mr. Traester: We awn and farm 2800 acxes that borders [on two sides) the proposed Helena Ch . mrcal Nelson Terminal. We strongly oppose the amendment to the existing A-:gricultt~r~{A} zoning code (section Z4-90} to allow Helena. Chemical to build its terminal zii.tliis location. . " Izt addition to the significant adverse impact on Qur land and.far~ing practices that would ,~ . .. result from.~~Teien's developtnez~t at Chia location,; by afnencling tbis section~the•flood gates will open for other-types of~use on this land. The flowing is a non-comprehensive list of adverse impacts to our land and interests: ~;~rieulture: Rice. t'armittg. regtaixes use ,of airpla~es~..to apply seed, fertilizer and pesticides, and airplanes require~adequate space to turn around after each pass. Development of the Helena terminal would end up boxing ln~rray Land on two sides. This would. eurtii_ our ability to use airplanes because i# zs not sate or Legal .for auplanes. to fly or turA that low over. homes, .. employment villages, andlor town .centers. ~. - A i~ture: We would be prphbited from applying certain pesticides and . herbicides within 5.00 feet of dais development. . "- A~.cult~re: QUr "right to farm" will be impacted from our normal farming " .practices once the ccimplaints start rolling ira for such things as dust and zzaise.." - Hazards: Z aru ,concerned about the:w'a'ste water co,llectiori;, ti~atment~and dispo~sat. Will a National Poliutaot Discharge Elimination System permit (NI~DES} ba issued for the proposed discharge from this development? [Tf this project is approved.an.d"NPDES general per~tit far storm vaster discharge associated-with construction. activities is retluixed.] - Hazatds: Storm .water should be a big cogcern. The banks of Dry Creek have been breachetl~ at least three (3)-times in known. history and when that lsappens, the water ends up on the proposed development site as it is the SIANCHI AG S~RV~C$S ! B.tANCHr CASE ifi • PO Box i i7 + Richvale CA 9574 . ~ P 530:882:4575 P~30.88~.4576 DCT+~6-~.1 ~~~2A FRQM:RNDERSON DRAG~zhE 530B~S1677 7'Q:6741365 P.~. Page 2 of 3 lowest elevation. Where will thesfugitive`fertili~ex and ehem~cals.enel~up when this happens next and Helena.plant is thero? A Ha~c;ds: A ten y~ study of water.quality in this area PVas jast ~,vmpleted and. tha findigg was that we have "super;ar" ~.uali~y water.. W e dan't seed someone who is ba.scd in Meznpl,~is;~'~x,~3'rysoz•aw~g°i~upaxtd.l3aving only e~ . - past facto accountability. Traaspo~`~(~c:.~:' lin~acfi=on roads with the increased traffic"by big rigs would be siguificant. . D Land. Use: There is available ground in Gridley, CA, both .bare and corxunercial-{zoned industrial}. ~Jhy not go there? (Is it because Helena executives believe Nelson is too small to fight this?} - A 'culture! Land Usel Cum a acts: The Bia~chx family i~ from . the Na#omas area ($acramenta County), Natomes is a perfect example.af leap frog development and how it can ruin a community. Leave the farm land where the farm land is, residential where. residential is,-and industrial in an industrial park. •, - Cotnxnenfs and inferences by Helena's employee thaf Helena is going to da this pxoje~t na matter what and tba# #hey are seekingFopiaions byflocalsbnly because they want to try to keep ci~tomers happy betrays their commtiaity partner zhetoric. - A Zt is further disturbing that over the past two (2}years we have tried to got together wiith Helena executives to discuss this project. We have tailed approximately 8 to l2 tfrr~.es:per year and' every time we are told, "We will get liaak to you." The local Helena represerit~t.ive, John Craw tells us he eanr~ot make decisions, yet we ar4e never introduced to someone who can. - What happens when Helena decides to Leave and we get someone worse? - Helena is currently using:Butte<Caunry Rice Growers Association (BUCRA) as a storage #'acility, Why do they need this one? (Has the relatiousllap with.BUCIAA gone .bad?) The County failed to evaluate the impact an our land in the TS/NOP.. The.pro~osed development of this facility could have a huge adverse;;impactto~ ciur farming operation, . even to the extent that farming could be tertnina#ed. A common sense question is, "'PVhy does this development have to be put smack ixx the middle of farm land?" The County sha~.ild be looking at in fill potential. Respectfially, T''"~un Bianchi v ~ :~ ~, 3 ~~ no v ~ti~ w ~-~ >i Qp 7'^ =.~.t j ~'f :,i.+ s'j~' _..;.~ ..E•• ~,,,~ i.1a ~: `+~ VJ [ ~' ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ F , mn ``~ ,lr ~' ~ C .. . ~ f sv I : .. .. '. .. ~ ~ \ ~ i} ~A ` .~ l~~S s` _ ~ ~ [} _ ' ':te ,~~ ~S 1 -^ ~ ~ r Fi^ ~~I. ~- .. •• :. ~ .y ~; ?~. . F i .. ~ ._ - :: ~14~:J r~;:~,r ' ........ c; `F.4 ..yycc~~ wG~ r S z i i