richardson international proposed grain storage … · the terminal consists of a rail receiving...

RICHARDSON INTERNATIONAL

PROPOSED GRAIN STORAGE PROJECT

ALTERNATIVES REPORT

January 18, 2013

1.0 RICHARDSON INTERNATIONAL VANCOUVER PORT TERMINAL OVERVIEW

In 1954, James Richardson & Sons, Limited formed a partnership with Federal and Searle Grain and became a one-third owner of the Midland Pacific Grain Terminal, then incorporated as Burrard Terminal Limited.

In 1972, James Richardson & Sons, Limited exercised its option to purchase the remaining two-thirds of Burrard Terminal Limited, becoming its sole owner. In 1975 fire destroyed the workhouse and dock at the Terminal. Following reconstruction, the terminal re-opened in 1979.

The Terminal consists of a rail receiving shed, a workhouse, two grain storage annexes, a pellet plant and a wharf equipped with two Peco ship loaders.

Today, the Richardson Vancouver Terminal, as it is now referred to, operates as one of the most efficient and safest terminal operation in the port of Vancouver.

2.0 PROPOSED GRAIN STORAGE PROJECT PARAMETERS & SITING ALTERNATIVES METHODOLOGY

Richardson has developed a business case for the addition of storage capacity having certainty in the future demands for Canadian grain exports. Absent of the addition of storage capacity, Richardson intends to handle and process as much grain as it is able to procure from Canadian farmers. The proposed grain storage project provides Richardson a more efficient means of handling more grains, while allowing for the mitigation of impacts related to noise and air quality. Through consultation with third party experts, Richardson has undergone extensive design build investigative work, in order to appropriately define parameters for the proposed grain storage project. It has been determined that 70,000MT of additional storage is the minimum volume required to meet current and future business demands, and is considerate of the need to prepare for and load Panamax sized vessels (65,000 – 70,000MT), receive and condition multiple grains in multiple storage segregations, respond to varying customer quality desires and manage and mitigate uncontrollable system constraints related to adverse weather, insufficient rail service, vessel delays and rail car cycle time (receiving, processing and returning railcars back to prairie grain handling facilities for reloading).

1

When considering the siting of the annex, Richardson established a number of criteria that was consistently applied to each grain storage siting alternative, including available land, constructability, business interruption, operational efficiency and impacts (view, shade, noise, dust and environment), to ensure an objective assessment of each of the alternatives. Additionally, feedback captured from seven public consultation sessions hosted by Richardson, in Vancouver, in October of 2012, was also applied to each of the proposed grain storage siting alternatives.

A summary of proposed grain storage siting alternatives, including the assessment of each against the criteria is provided in

summary in Table 1.

3.0 PROPOSED EAST ANNEX

Siting the proposed grain storage annex at the east end of the existing terminal workhouse is not without its challenges. The east side of the site is constrained to the south by the need to maintain an emergency service roadway, to the north by the rail yard necessary for CN to deliver rail cars and for Richardson to draw rail cars from into its receiving area, and to the east by both the Cargill facility and the need for Richardson to maintain a truck turn around lane and emergency services entry/egress point. In order to construct the proposed grain storage annex east of the existing terminal, the pellet storage bins which currently store manufactured GSPs (animal feed pellets made from the bi products of the grain handling process (screenings and dust)) must be dismantled and removed, and a portion of the south east rail yard realigned. The proposed east annex development directly impacts the view at 12 residential properties (more than 50% of future field of vision view lost) and somewhat impacts the view at a further 17 residential properties (less than 50% of future field of vision view lost). Notwithstanding these challenges, the east annex siting has been identified as the most appropriate siting given; the available land for development; it doesn’t require foreshore or in water works and therefore it doesn’t compromise fish and fish habitat; it causes the least business interruption during construction (the foundation can be piled while the terminal is operating); it allows for the most efficient and direct connection of conveyance to and from the existing workhouse; and noise and dust impacts can be mitigated.

2

Figure 1

��

3

��

Figure 2

4

��

�

Figure 3

5

�� !��

Figure 4

6

4.0 WEST ANNEX ALTERNATIVE OPTION

Siting the proposed grain storage annex at the west end of the existing west annex is also not without its challenges. The west side of the site is constrained by the operating rail yard, which is situated to the north of the existing terminal. The dimensions of the west rail yard, necessary to service the receipt of loaded and staging of empty railcars, significantly restricts further west annex development. In order to construct the proposed grain storage annex to the west of the existing grain storage annex, additional lands need to be acquired and a significant portion of the west rail yard relocated to the north, along the CN right of way Relocating the west rail yard to the north not only significantly reduces its capacity, rendering it much less efficient and incapable of supporting the grain receiving system, it also positions the west rail yard much closer to residential properties, further impacting residential properties. A west annex siting would not require foreshore or in water works and therefore doesn’t impact fish and fish habitat, and does allow the facility to operate through at least the construction of the foundation, however it is a very inefficient alternative when considering how the structure can be connected to the existing terminal and workhouse to allow for the conveyance of grains and oilseeds to and from the annex. In this siting, the proposed grain storage annex would need to be incorporated within existing conveyance systems, limiting the grain distribution and reclaim paths necessary to convey grains and oilseeds to and from the workhouse. Furthermore, this siting would also require the installation of additional elevating legs at the top of the proposed storage annex to allow for the movement of grains and oilseeds to and from the silos, contributing to further view, shade and noise impacts at residential properties.

7

�

�" ��

Figure 6

�� "�� #��

Figure 5

8

5.0 SOUTH WEST (WATER) ALTERNATIVE OPTION

There is not sufficient land mass to construct the proposed grain storage annex at the south side of the existing west annex. The roadway that runs directly along the shore line at the south side of the west annex serves as the main access/egress for vehicle traffic to and from the terminal and occupies all of the available land south west end of the terminal. Regulation stipulates that this roadway be maintained at a minimum of six (6) meters wide. Construction of the proposed grain storage annex to the south of the existing west grain storage annex requires land be reclaimed in the Burrard Inlet. Reclamation of land would not only have a significant impact on fish and fish habitat it would also require the relocation of the terminal’s existing vessel berth and loading system, in order for it to be accessible by vessels. It is assumed that any relocation of the vessel berth and loading system would have to occur out into the Burrard inlet which would further impact vessel traffic flow and congestion in the inlet, as vessels travelled to and from facilities in the area. Siting the proposed grain storage annex south west of the terminal (in water) would require it be incorporated within existing conveyance systems, limiting the grain distribution and reclaim paths which allow grains and oilseeds to move between the workhouse and silos. Furthermore, this siting would also require the installation of additional conveyance and elevating legs, spanning over the roadway and over top of the existing west annex, further contributing to view, shade and noise impacts at residential properties. In order to connect the proposed grain storage annex to the existing terminal the bottom conveyance system which draws grain from the silos to the workhouse for shipping to vessel would have to be constructed below grade and in a water tight tunnel to eliminate water table seepage. Siting the proposed grain storage annex as an in water development would render the current active facility completely inoperable for an extended period of time. Richardson has not pursued the south west in water siting for the proposed grain storage annex given there is sufficient land available for on site development.

9

South West (Water) Alternative Option ��!��

Figure 6

10

6.0 SOUTH WEST (LAND) ALTERNATIVE OPTION

There is not sufficient land to construct the grain storage annex at the south west side of the existing terminal on land.

11

7.0 NORTHWEST (OVER RAILYARD) ALTERNATIVE OPTION

Siting the proposed grain storage annex at the north side of the existing terminal facility presents significant challenges in that the entire north side of the terminal is occupied by the rail yard required for the business to exist. Developing the proposed grain storage annex over the rail yard (as suggested by some during public consultation) is not feasible as the orientation of the piling would not allow for the required clearance envelope around the rail tracks and it would severely reduce the rail yard capacity, rendering the facility completely non functional. Notwithstanding major operational issues, this alternative would also contribute to significant view, shade and noise impacts at residential properties.

12

��#��"�� "�� #��

(North of Existing West Annex)

Figure 7

13

Table 1

View Shade Noise Dust Construction

Available

Land

Business

Interruption

Operational

Efficiency

Environmental

Impact

(Land/Water)

Proposed

East Annex

12 properties

directly

impacted

25 properties

somewhat

impacted

During month

of December

only

29 properties

some impact

between 9

am – 12 noon

23 properties

some impact

between 12

noon – 3 pm

No properties

continually

impacted

between 12

noon and 3

pm

Rail yard

activity noise

Operating

noise impacts

Dust impact

does not

change from

one

alternative

to the other

Requires minor

track removal/

re –alignment

Requires

removal of

existing pellet

bins

Available

land allows

for lay out at

height that is

consistent

with existing

west annex

(uniformity

of entire

facility)

Least impact

on existing

facility

operations

Allows facility

to continue to

operate at

current

capacity

throughout the

24 month

construction

period

Minimal

disruption to

pellet

processing as

pellet storage

is displaced

within existing

annex while

new annex

construction is

being

completed

Most efficient

and direct

connection to

the workhouse

where all

grains and

oilseeds are

received,

before being

processed

through the

terminal and

loaded onto a

vessel through

the Vessel

Loading

system

loading

system

No fore shore or

in water works

required

No potentially

harmful impacts

(alteration,

disruption or

destruction) to

fish and fish

habitats

Minor excavation

of lands

View Shade Noise Dust Construction Available

Land

Business

Interruption

Operational

Efficiency

Environmental

Impact

(Land/Water)

West Annex

Alternative

Option

8 properties

directly

impacted

25 properties

some impact

Additional

conveyance

required to

move grain to

and from new

west annex

over existing

west annex for

connection to

workhouse

adds significant

height to

existing west

annex

During month

of December

only

17 properties

some impact

between

noon and 5

pm

Increased

west rail yard

shunting

impacts at

residential

properties to

the north

(west rail

yard must be

shifted north

to accommo-

date annex

development

Increased

equipment

required

(conveyance

and dust

collection

systems) and

create noise

impacts at

nearby

properties

which are

more difficult

to mitigate

Dust impact

does not

change from

one

alternative

to the other

Requires major

rail yard re-

configuration

Results in

significantly

reduced yard

capacity

Requires

acquisition

of land at

300 Low

Level Road

for rail yard

relocation

Insufficient

land

available to

maintain rail

yard

capacity at

current level

as required

by current

and future

business

needs

Significant

business

interruption

during rail

yard re-

configuration

Facility only

able to

operate at

reduced

capacity

throughout the

24 month

construction

period

CN unable to

spot longer

trains in to

reconfigured

west yard due

to idling

restrictions in

tunnel

Rail yard

significantly

reduced and

completely

inefficient

No direct

connection to

workhouse

where all

grains and

oilseeds are

received and

processed for

loading onto a

vessel through

the Vessel

Loading

system

Additional and

longer runs of

mechanical /

conveyance

systems

reduces

efficiency and

creates

additional

impacts

No fore shore or

in water works

required

No potentially

harmful impacts

(alteration,

disruption or

destruction) to

fish and fish

habitats

Minor excavation

of lands

Rail yard

establishment

required at

acquired land

where rail does

not exist at

present time


Land

Business

Interruption

Operational

Efficiency

Environmental

Impact

(Land/Water)

South West

Annex

(Water)

Alternative

Option

South West

Annex

(Land)

Alternative

Option

Impact

estimated to be

increased at

approximately

24 residences

(already

impacted by

existing

annex/work-

house)

New annex to

be 65ft taller

than the

existing west

annex – further

impacting

residences

located further

up the hill

(already

impacted)

Insufficient land

to develop

Shade impact

increases

significantly

on west side

due to new

annex being

65ft taller

than existing

west annex

height

Worst shade

most likely to

occur in the

month of

December

Shade unlikely to occur between March and September

N/A

The addition

of new annex

conveyance

and dust

collection

systems

contributes to

noise impact

Noise impact from reflection at existing dust collection system

N/A

Dust impact does not change from one alternative to the other

N/A

Most complex

to construct

Requires

reclamation to

create land

mass for

development

Requires

significantly

deeper piling

due to depth of

till

Requires relocation of entire vessel berth and PECO loading system into harbor

N/A

No land

available at

South West

area of site

Requires in water development

N/A

Facility completely inoperable for an extended period of time

N/A

No direct

connection to

workhouse

where all

grains and

oilseeds are

received and

processed for

loading onto a

vessel through

the Vessel

Loading

system

Additional and longer runs of mechanical / conveyance systems reduces efficiency and creates additional impacts

N/A

In water works

required

Permanent

destruction/

harmful impacts

(alteration,

disruption or

destruction) to

fish and fish

habitats – when

alternate siting for

annex

development is

feasible

Major excavation

of lands

Major reclamation of lands

N/A


Land

Business

Interruption

Operational

Efficiency

Environmental

Impact

(Land/Water)

Northwest

(Over

Railyard)

Annex

Alternative

Option

Increased

impacts as

height of new

annex is

increased

beyond 65ft

(over existing

annex) to allow

for the

installation of

conveyance

beneath silos

and over rail

tracks

(estimated 40ft

higher)

Potentially 24

residences

having an

existing impacts

will be more

significantly

impacted

Shade impact

increases

significantly

on north side

due to new

annex height

being 65ft

taller than

existing

annex height

plus

increased

height to

allow for the

installation of

conveyance

beneath silos

and over rail

tracks (40ft)

Worst shade would occur in the month of December - unlikely to occur between March and September

Increased

mechanical

and

conveyance

equipment

and rail yard

reflected

noise impacts

at properties

most difficult

to mitigate

Dust impact

does not

change from

one

alternative

to the other

Not

constructible -

as a raised silo

structure over

rail tracks

Rail yard

significantly

reduced and

completely

inoperable if

constructed in

place of rail

yard tracks

Unable to

maintain rail

yard

capacity at

current level

as required

by current

and future

business

needs

Facility

completely

inoperable –

no rail yard to

receive rail

cars

Loss of most

of the rail yard

- rail yard no

longer viable

to feed facility

requirements

No fore shore or

in water works

required

No potentially

harmful impacts

(alteration,

disruption or

destruction) to

fish and fish

habitats

Appendix A

Technical Memorandum

Richardson Grain Storage Project Placement Options

267 East Braemar Road North Vancouver B.C. V7N 1R2 Tel: (604) 980-8664 Cell: (604) 671-2150 Email: [email protected]

1

DWARDS CM

ngineering & Project Management

�� !��"��#��$%�&��"��'��(�)��*��+*�,$�� )��)��)��- ��.�� )�)��/�� !��-�!.�� )�� )��0��(��(� ��)�� )��1#�2�� (�/ �� 3��/��(��0�� 4�� 0��3 �(��(�� )�� )��0��%�$�� #�� !�� (��)��0�5��3��0��3��0�/�� #�2��/��0��2�� 3��6�$�%�6$#�2��2�� 0��)� ��(��7��3 �� )�� 3 �� (��(��0�� (�� #�2��7��3 �� 1� ��(��/� ��3��3�� 3�� 0�3��0��0�3��#�� 3��)��1�� )��1�� 8'9�'� ��(��)��0�� )��1#�2�� 0��

�

New Storage Annex

Existing Storage Annex


Workhouse


2

DWARDS CM


�� 2�� /��:3�� /�� 3��7��0�� )� ��#�"��)�� /�� (��(��/��3��/��)�� )��0��/#�"��)�� /��3��3��0��0��3�7��)��3�7 �� 0��1#�� 3��/�� 3��3�� (�� 0��(��3(�� #�2��0�3��(��3��(�� (��)#��&(�� 2��(��(� ��0�� )��1�� 0��7��3 ��00�� (��7��3 ��00��/#�2�� 3��(�� 3��/�� /�� 3��#�!�� /�� 7��3 �� )��/�� )��) #��

�

New Storage Annex


New Storage Annex


3

DWARDS CM


�� 2��1� ��)�� /��3��/�� /��(�� 3�� 7 ��3��)��)��0��/�� (��#�!�� 3��0�� #�!0�� (� ��3��3)��#�� 3��/�� 3��3�� (�� 0��(��3(�� #�2��0�3��(��3��(�� (��)#�� 3��3�� #��&(�� */��)��0��/��7��3 �� )��3��3 ��1� ��)��/��#�2�� 3��3��0�(�� 3��3 �� 3��)��0��7��3 �#�83�� )��)��) ��3��:3��(��0�� )��1#�� (��(��3��:3��1� ��)�� /��0�� )�� #�!��3��:3��)��/��'� �� #�'�3��!�� /��3��/�3�� 3�� 3��)��7#��!�� )�� /��(��(��/�3 ��)��)�� #��

�� 2�� 3�� )�� 0�� ;�� 3��0��1� ��)�� 1�� 300��#�2�� 3��)��/��3��3 ��3��0�<�� #�2��


4

DWARDS CM


�� 3��3��/��3(�� 0��#�� 3�� 3�� (��0��*3��!��3��#�� 3��/��)��0��*3��!��3��00��3��3 ��0/�0�� (��)�� /��0�8� �� 0�� (�� #��2��)� ��0�� 3�� (3� 3��3�� )��0��0��:3�� 3��)��(��) ��3��(��0��)�� )��0��3(��3��(�� #��&(�� 2��0��(�� 3��3�� 3��/�� (��0��1�� (��1� ��)��/#�=��1� ��)�� 3 ��3��3��)��3��#�2�� 3��:3��1�� 3()��0��(�� :3�� #��

�� 0�� 0�� 3��/��3(��/��/��#�� 3��7 ��3��0�� #��)� ��)��7 ��3��(3� 3�� (��)�� (��3��7��(��3�� /��(��/��0��/��#��

New Storage Annex


5

DWARDS CM


�� 3��/��2�� (�� 3�� 3)�� !��:3�� 0��1��03��/��#��3 �� *� ��)��0�� (�� 3�� )��(�� 0��(�� )�/�� (��00�� 3��#��!0�/�3��/�:3� �� (�� 3 �7��#��>�3� ��3�/��7��# �)#�9��9��3��3�� )��

akammerl

Snapshot

richardson international proposed grain storage … · the terminal consists of a rail receiving...

Documents