Press Banner

Doesn't it seem a bit odd that according to the article the City used$1.02 million from the city's affordable housing fund to buy the land for the Town Center retail project. This doesn't sound ethical. Can someone explain this? Votes: -1

Easy explanation -- the town center project includes a rather healthy volume of housing (to be situated above the stores), and some portion of this will be reserved for those whose incomes fall within certain ranges. So this contribution suggests more of a partnership between the City's RDA and the project developer, to provide affordable housing, then what we traditionally have seen which is the developer being required (on their own) to set aside some number of units as affordable. The RDA has been accumulating affordable housing funds for some years now, but since it doesn't have authority to directly build affordable housing (there's a separate political process needed for that), this is probably a pretty good way to leverage those funds for more units. Votes: +1

The two propane facilities will once again be placed near each other in the center of Scotts Valley, right near homes, schools, churches, businesses, and retail.

The reason the tanks have to be moved now is that it isn't safe for them to be in a central business district. So what makes the central business district in northeast Scotts Valley different from the town center business district?

Is the northeast end of Scotts Valley expendable? We are moving a potential bomb right back into the center of town. Doesn't anyone see a problem with this? Votes: +2

The reason for moving the tanks has nothing to do with a lack of safety at the current location. The only reason for moving them is because no one wants to build a town center at the end of road buried in SV's industrial sector (where the tanks are proposed to go). If the tanks are moved, the new installation will meet all current fire codes. And the new location has far less drive-by traffic. So in terms of likelihood for accidents and safe containment of any accidents, the new proposed location would be superior.

Fear is a difficult thing for people to deal with. But before you get too agitated over these tanks moving to the north end of town, remember that you've got one (or two) 15-20 gallon tanks of gasoine sitting in your own garage. We've learned to live with flammable materials in our society, thanks to effective codes and regulations governing their use and storage. If you trust them with one part of your life (your car), ask yourself why you're so fearful with this other part. Propane storage has quite a good track record. Votes: -1

Ask the people of Kings County how safe they feel having been recently evacuated due to a massive propane tank explosion from a perfectly "safe" facility governed by these same codes and security measures.

If the facility is so safe, why does the Hazard Analysis commissioned by the City of Scotts Valley declare that “These facilities are not generally located in Central Business District areas, which include residential, assembly, and recreational uses" and recommend moving the tanks to reduce the risk of a BLEVE event (i.e. explosion) along Mt. Herman Rd.

This light industrial area is only about 1 block wide, right in the middle of many homes, churches, schools, shops, and people. In fact, the new Suburban Propane location is much closer to homes (within a couple hundred feet) than the old location (about 1000 feet away).

Because it sits right along Highway 17, it is also in fact next to the busiest road in the county.

There's a big difference in risk between 15 gallons of gas and 30,000 gallons of propane. Some risks are just not worth taking.

There is no reason for us to settle for having giant propane tanks in the middle of Scotts Valley. The City Council should continue to look for a remote location far from homes, people, schools, churches, businesses, shops, commuters, etc. Votes: +2

You're suggesting that the Council shut down the existing facilities. That's eminent domain, and it wouldn't hold up in court because the implication (that these facilities are not sufficiently safe to be near people) would hold everywhere. Which it won't. Because there is a code-making process that this country relies upon.

There was no major propane tank explosion in King's County (Kettleman City) this last June. It was initially reported as that, but subsequent stories revealed "an industrial accident sparked a fire at the Con-Way Freight terminal in Kettleman City, along Highway 41. A leak, possibly caused by a forklift, caused a rack of five-to-seven gallon propane tanks to catch fire, resulting in a series of explosions that rocked the building and sent employees scattering. County firefighters had to shut down several gas valves and get rid of the residual gas to help keep the fire from spreading closer to the nearby 1,000-gallon tanks. Firefighters had the situation under control in just over an hour."

There were no injuries and the event was fully contained within two hours. Yes, accidents can happen. But look behind the causes before claiming that the sky is falling.
Votes: -3

Even explosions started by leaks can kill--see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16072816/ It is not necessary to apply eminent domain--since the propane companies are willing to move, they should be moved to remote locations away from homes, schools, and people. The situation in Kings County caused road closures, evacuations, and massive damage. What if the road closure and damage were to Highway 17 (a hundred feet away from the proposed Suburban Propane site). What about the three schools (Montessori School, A Circle of Friends School, Baymonte) that would have to be evacuated?

Why go to all the trouble of moving the propane tanks only to put them right back into the middle of town?

. Votes: +3

There was no damage outside the immediate location of where the tanks were stored on the Kettleman City property. Hwy 41 was closed for one hour, because they wanted to ensure they could keep the other propane tanks cool. The proposed new facility in SV would have an automatic water deluge system. You need to better understand the technology and how propane tanks are designed, and how their safety features work, before jumping to fatalistic conclusions.

The propane companies are only willing to move to locations that suit them. Remote locations don't fit that bill because they are a commercial business that needs to be accessible, and especially they need to be adjacent to sufficiently wide roads to handle their trucks. There are still a lot of people in our County that rely on propane, which is why these businesses continue to be here. Earlier efforts (ten or more years ago) to just move both of these facilities out of town encountered serious legal problems, which has brought us to the more collaborative effort to relocate and upgrade to the most current codes. The argument not to relocate because it won't be "safe" for your neighborhood is the same argument that they shouldn't be where they are. And there is no legally defensible argument to just shut them down where they are. So you'll need a different argument if you want to successfully fight this. Votes: -3

You should be more worried about the hundreds of fuel tankers that traverse in front of your home every week! Talk about the potential risks, you've got a mobile bomb, right? Since that it the term you are using to describe storage tanks. So what are you going to do? Suggest that the highway be moved next. Why is it that people get so hypersensitive to anything they don't understand. These propane stations are a lot safer then the other dangers near or around you. I can't think of better location. Industrialized area, central location, easy access to the highway. But unless these stations get moved to the moon someone is always going to complain. Get over it or go live in a bubble. If you don't want responsible growth and progress, i.e. the town center, then move to Santa Cruz. Votes: +2

The proposed Propane facility move to the Janis Way site and the Scarbough site is so dangerous that the City Center can’t be built. Why? Because it will blow up the entire Center and kill all the shoppers if there is an accident or terrorist attack. Then we are told there is nothing to fear. We are told there is a water deluge system. And where did this information come from? It is not in the EIR which I doubt some responders have not read. The population of Janis way is one of the heaviest in Scotts Valley, the streets are jammed the blast zone covers a mile in every direction and this will take out most of the heart of the valley. The effect is far beyond the small industrial area and includes many homes, businesses and more commercial area than the new proposed business center. Indeed the argument that the tanks should not be where they are is the same that they won’t be “safe” at the new location either. The citizens need to say no to locating these dangerous tanks within the city limits. Votes: +3

Charles -- the water deluge system is explicitly described in the environmental document that has been in the public domain for review since June 13. Page 16, under the discussion of hazardous materials. The fire suppression system is stated to be capable of wetting the entire container surface at a water rate of 750 gpm. Did you not read this? This will all be discussed in great detail at the planning commission meeting scheduled for August 28. Votes: -3

Did anyone see the propane on fire shooting straight up and a few feet wide earlier in the week? I was pulling out of McDonalds with the kids, and waiting in traffic I looked to the left. I couldn't believe my eyes, the tank was on fire! And of course I was trapped in slow rolling traffic. It was a really weird feeling knowing if it blew, it would have blown a hole right where we were driving through. I just hope they more it, move it to a safe place and do it sooner than later.

I wonder if the paper will cover this? Maybe no one reported it.


Votes: +3

By the way, it was the back of a delivery truck which was on fire, it was backed up right next the giant tank. There must have been others who saw this. Votes: +3

This incident certainly warrants investigation (and reporting). But let's not confuse ignited propane from a leak (both the leak and the ignition warrant investigation, because neither should happen)with the risk of a tank being damaged and posing a widespread danger. Propane burning in air as it is released from the tank doesn't pose much of a hazard (provided there are no flammable materials nearby). It is only when a significant portion of the tank is impinged by a sustained heat source that the internal pressure will rise. As long as propane is being released from the tank at a rate greater than the imposed heat is causing an internal pressure rise, the tank (whose mechanical strength is very great compared to the normal internal pressure) will be just fine. This is exactly the kind of discussion and understanding that is needed in the community. Everyone who lives near or has a propoane tank (even a 1.5 gallon bbq tank) should learn about the relative risks so they can take appropriate cautions. There are lots of dangerous things in our lives, and we all need to take some responsibility to get informed so we can make sound decisions. Votes: -2

TORONTO, Aug. 10 (UPI) -- Two people were injured Sunday in a massive propane explosion that rocked a Toronto neighborhood, officials say.

Residents within a one-mile radius of the Sunrise Propane depot in the city's northwest side were evacuated early Sunday, with buses brought in to take them away from the disaster zone, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported.

Witnesses said multiple explosions began just before 4 a.m., with the first explosion so big it could be heard more than 4 miles away. It reportedly shook nearby homes, setting them on fire and blowing out windows. Votes: +1