|
Printer Friendly
Municipal Research News - Planning Near Pipelines - Did the San Bruno Explosion Wake You Up?
Planning Near Pipelines - Did the San Bruno Explosion Wake You Up?
As our urban areas expand, it is crucial that cities and counties address the issue of development near pipelines. The tragedies in Bellingham in 1999 and recently in San Bruno, California are a clear warning that risks can be minimized but never eliminated when dealing with major, high pressure petroleum or natural gas pipelines. Transmission pipelines are located in 28 Washington counties and are either in, or within one mile of, over 110 Washington cities. Do you know the location of the major pipelines nearest to where you live and work?
Only a half dozen cities or counties in Washington have zoning or development regulations addressing the types of land uses that are appropriate directly adjacent to a major transmission pipeline easement. In fact, most jurisdictions do not mention transmission pipelines in their zoning or development regulations. The presence of a major pipeline is not even an item specifically listed on the standard SEPA checklist used by local governments in the state of Washington, and there are no state or federal regulations dealing with land development near major energy pipelines. In the absence of such regulations, property owners can build single family or multifamily structures, hospitals, or elder care facilities directly adjacent to transmission pipeline easements.
If a property owner or developer submits a complete application for construction next to a major energy pipeline easement in your jurisdiction, Washington’s vesting statutes (e.g., RCW 19.27.095, RCW 58.17.033) provide that the project is vested under the rules in effect on the date of the submission. Nothing can be done about development that has already occurred or which is being processed, but future development or redevelopment can be regulated if regulations are in place prior to the time that a development permit application is filed.
In the past, there has been scant guidance on options for land use planning in the vicinity of transmission pipelines, but that is changing. A broad-based stakeholder task force, formed with the assistance of the federal Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), is about to release an extensive report listing numerous "recommended practices" for land development near existing pipelines. The draft recommendations are now posted on the MRSC web page "Planning Near Pipelines" at http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/pubsafe/transpipes.aspx, and the full report will be linked as soon as it is issued. Several cities and counties in Washington have already adopted relevant development regulations, including the cities of Redmond and La Center and Whatcom and Benton counties. Those samples are posted on the MRSC web page.
AWC is currently administering a federal technical assistance grant under which MRSC and the Pipeline Safety Trust are reaching out to Washington local governments to educate planners and elected officials. The goal is to encourage and support the development of planning regulations dealing with land development near transmission pipelines. Any city or county may contact Jim Doherty, MRSC Legal Consultant, jdoherty@mrsc.org, or Carl Weimer, Executive Director of the Bellingham-based Pipeline Safety Trust, carl@pstrust.org, for assistance. The federal grant covers all costs for the assistance. Skagit County was also recently awarded a separate federal grant to help with the development of appropriate regulations.
The planning issues are relatively straightforward and include:
- What zoning makes sense?
- What procedural steps can be taken to make sure that pipelines are considered when excavation or development permits are issued?
- What types of development regulations can help to reasonably incorporate this essential infrastructure into our communities?
There are some relatively basic, uncontroversial steps that can be taken while the community discusses more detailed regulations. Adoption of a "consultation zone" ordinance may be one of the most effective and least costly changes to consider. The "consultation zone" concept is discussed in the two "Planning Near Pipelines Presentations" that are linked from the web page "Planning Near Pipelines" at http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/pubsafe/transpipes.aspx.
Landowners generally have the right to make reasonable use of their property, but that does not give them the right to develop their land in a way that is inconsistent with the community’s basic right to protect lives and property. A balance needs to be struck. A local government can prohibit uses that bring many vulnerable people to property close to a pipeline (for instance, elder care facilities), but allow uses that are less intense. If no beneficial use of the property is allowed, that would constitute a "taking" and compensation would have to be paid.
This is a difficult time to tackle pipeline issues. Planning staffs have been cut in most jurisdictions and there is a reluctance to take on new issues. But what is more essential than making prudent planning decisions that safeguard our communities from a danger that is buried underground and too often ignored? It is unreasonable to assume that the residents of our communities are educated regarding the risks of living or working in the vicinity of a transmission pipeline. They may not even be aware of a pipeline easement near their homes or workplaces.
If your city or county would not allow the construction of an apartment building or a hospital next to a massive above-ground gasoline storage tank, should you allow that type of development on property crossed by a major petroleum pipeline? How close should single family homes be built to a transmission pipeline? These questions need to be asked and answered by each local government jurisdiction.
Local government officials and planners can ignore this issue if they believe transmission pipelines never rupture, or landowners and/or developers will always do the "right" thing and choose to voluntarily develop less intensively on land near pipelines. However, city and county leaders should ask themselves: If a major pipeline rupture occurs in the future, will the newspapers applaud our foresight for making wise decisions regarding development near the pipeline, or condemn us for ignoring the issue? All risk cannot be avoided, but risk can be minimized through prudent land use development regulations and procedures.
Extensive information on this topic is posted on the MRSC "Planning Near Pipelines" web page http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/pubsafe/transpipes.aspx with additional resources linked from that page.
| 
