§ 226.1.

CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA FOR POWER PLANTS

a.

Applicability. These controls shall apply to all power plants in M-1 and M-2 Zones.

b.

Prior Nonconforming Uses. Consistent with Article 1.7 of the Planning Code, nonconforming power plant uses shall require conditional use authorization in order to enlarge, intensify, or extend the use if such changes would expand a power plant use, make it more permanent, or substantially change the use. An intensification of use shall include the following changes, without limitation and in addition to the criteria set forth in Article 1.7 of the Planning Code:

1.

An increase in output capability by more than 10% (either an increase in capacity or increase in planned or permitted output per year);

2.

A change in type of fuel;

3.

A greater than five percent increase in the volume of monthly discharge of waste water into the sewer or into the San Francisco Bay, or an increase in the temperature of existing waste water discharges into the San Francisco Bay;

4.

Any increase greater than five percent in the emission rate or the total annual tons of emission for particulate precursors, ozone precursors or greenhouse gases;

5.

A greater than five percent increase in the volume of regulated substances used on-site on a monthly basis, or in the volume of regulated substances stored on-site or in the volume of regulated substances transported to the site on a monthly basis; or

6.

Improvements to any power generation unit costing more than 25 percent of the assessed value of the same unit prior to improvement.

c.

Criteria. In acting on any application for conditional use authorization for a power plant under Section 226(p), the Commission shall consider the conditional use authorization requirements set forth in Article 3 of the Planning Code and, in addition, shall only approve an application for a conditional use authorization if facts are presented to establish that, on the basis of the record before the Commission:

1.

The benefits to the City’s energy system resulting from the energy generated by the proposed power plant cannot be obtained in a reasonable time from a technically and economically feasible power plant and/or energy conservation project that would have materially fewer potential environmental impacts considering, but not limited to, the following: (a) emissions of criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions; (b) stormwater and wastewater discharges; and (c) noise and vibration impacts.

2.

A newly proposed power plant use would not directly and adversely impact existing or reasonably foreseeable adjoining land uses, or, as applied to a prior nonconforming use, the extension of the power plant use or the increase in intensity of the use would not result in increased direct and adverse impacts on existing or reasonably foreseeable adjoining land uses; and

3.

Granting conditional use authorization would not reasonably be expected to leave known contamination in place in such a way that would prolong or increase public health risks associated with such contamination at levels inconsistent with a risk-based remediation consistent with the proposed power plant use; and

4.

Granting conditional use authorization would not reasonably be expected to preclude future redevelopment and reuse of the property for non-power plant uses.

d.

Written Findings. The Planning Commission shall make detailed written findings explaining the basis for its decision under this Section.

e.

Severability. In the event that a court or agency of competent jurisdiction holds that federal or state law, rule or regulation invalidates any clause, sentence, paragraph of this Section or the application thereof to any person or circumstances, it is intended that the court or agency sever such clause, sentence, paragraph or section so that the remainder of this Section shall remain in effect.

History

(Added by Ord. 282-08, File No. 081058, App. 12/5/2008)

Download

  • Plain Text
  • JSON

Comments