News

Committee takes a second look

By Scott Wagar

03/03/2015

After what appears to be a misunderstanding with Bottineau’s Planning Committee concerning Paterson Grain LLC (PGL) in January, the two parties came back together on Feb. 25 to take another look at PGL’s plan to construct a grain handling facility south of city limits directly behind Johnson Sport Center on about 200 acres of land.

On Jan. 26, PGL, which is headquartered out of Winnipeg, MB, met with the planning committee to request that its plan be approved. However, the committee turned down PGL on a vote of four to three because the main entrance to the facility comes off south Brander Street, which isn’t a truck route but a residential street.

Those on the committee that voted PGL’s request down stated they were not against the project, but were against utilizing south Brander to enter into the facility’s property. The recommendation by the committee was for PGL to find a new route to truck its grain. 

However, PGL stated to the committee members that a different route to its facility would cost anywhere from $1 to $2.5 million, which would not be cost effective for the company. 

According to PGL, its grain facility would receive grain and oil seeds from both U.S. and Canadian ag producers through two 630,700 bushel steel bins, and ten 10,970 bushel steel bins. 

PGL estimated that 25 to 30 tri-axel truckloads would utilize the facility on a daily basis, which would be picked up by Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) rail through a loop rail line that would run through the facility and back on to BNSF’s main spur line. 

PGL would also hire eight to 12 full time employees to operate the facility.

This past Wednesday, Feb. 25, the planning committee and PGL came back together with a standing room only crowd in the public forum to re-discuss the grain handling facility and its presence in Bottineau.

The meeting started out with the committee rescinding their original vote of denying PGL access on to south Brander Street.
Murray Frose, director of corporate affairs for PGL, then made six requests which he asked the committee to support, which included:

● Approval of the proposed grain handling facility
● Rezoning a portion of the subject lands, as required, to allow for construction and operation of a grain handling facility
● Approval of land exchange between Paterson and Loren Johnson, and creation of the required out lot plats
● Approval of a building permit for Johnson to build a storage shed on the exchanged property east of south Thompson Street
● Re-designating Brander Street as a truck route to allow truck access to the site 
● Approval of a building permit for the grain handling facility and related loop track

Committee member, Eric Nostdahl, started the discussion and stated that the key point in the first motion in January was not allowing PGL to utilize south Brander Street as an access road to its facility. He stated that he still had concern over Brander Street being used as a truck route (because the street wasn’t built for semis; and, he had concern for the safety of the large number of children in that area). 

Nostdahl also stated that he wanted it known that when a recommendation was decided upon, and goes to council, that the aldermen know that south Brander Street is a controversial topic.

Diane Lorenz, council member, and chair of the planning committee, stated that she felt the topic should have been tabled in January to grant the committee sometime to review PGL’s request before voting on the issue. 

Lorenz added that in this residential district there are no sidewalks and that adults and children alike have to use south Brander Street to get to the walking trail along side of Highway 5. She added that walking to the trail concerned her if it meant grain trucks traveling down south Brander. 

However, Lorenz also said that a recent discussion had taken place about extending the walking trail to that residential district, which would be placed along Oak Creek on the west side and away from south Brander.

Committee member Clayton Parrill stated that south Brander Street didn’t concern him as much when it comes to trucks using that street, but he was more concerned about trucks getting back on Highway 5. He stated that he would like to see the trucks go back down south Brander and only turn east on to Highway and out of town, instead turning west and going down Highway 5 through one of the busiest parts of town.

Duane Larson, planning committee member, stated that he had talked to PGL earlier in the day and explained to them that if PGL is approved to use south Brander he feels that it is only fair that PGL pays for the majority of repaving the road considering the number of trucks that will utilize the road to get to PGL’s grain facility. He added that the businesses on that street shouldn’t have to pay an equal share on any pavement improvements.

Lorenz then opened the discussion to the public forum, which appeared to be split 50-50 for those in favor and against the grain handling facility. 

Those in favor of PGL were individuals interested in improving the economic development of the city, especially now with numerous downtown stores closing, leaving empty buildings standing on the street. 

“I’ve been involved in economic development in Bottineau for about 20 years and we have done as much as we can to bring something to town, we have had telemarketers, we have had whatever else, but they come and they go,” Lenny McGuire said. “This is the biggest project with no request, except a permit, that I have seen come to Bottineau. We are looking at a $20 to $25 million investment. They are asking the city for no money, they are asking the county for no money, except permission to come. The spin-off that we have already heard in conjunction with these guys could be another $12 million worth of stuff coming to town. That’s far bigger than we have ever anticipated. 

“The other thing is that in the old days there was talk about manufacturing and to have this come and that come,” McGuire added. “The biggest industry in North Dakota is grain, is agriculture, and that is what these people are in. We are not reinventing anything and our agriculture is never going to go away. For the city’s benefit we have to do everything in our power to get them into our community and go from there with economic development.” 

Those against PGL were residents from 13th Street SE and south Thompson Street who had concerns about their children’s safety with grain trucks in the area, a railroad loop, along with health and environmental safety issues of having a grain handling facility in their own backyard.

“I’m not against growth, but obviously I am a parent of a nine year son who lives in that area and I am concerned about truck traffic, I am concerned about noise, I am concerned about grain dust. Can you tell me what mechanism would be in place to control grain dust coming on the property adjacent to it, its residents, as well as noise?” Brian Palmer said. 

Frose stated that the closest house to the closest bin would  be 1,200 feet, that PGL was not planning to put in a dryer at its facility, that they would have dust control and that all of their equipment would be the most state of the art equipment to protect these neighborhoods and its residents.

The topic of PGL’s access to its facility came up numerous times in the meeting. Shane Paterson, corporate development officer for PGL, stated that his family’s company looked at a variety of road options while planning this project, but outside of south Brander any other road would cost PGL millions of dollars to carry out, which wasn’t feasible monetarily for PGL to move forward with in this project.

As residents of the south Thompson Street continue to protest Brander Street as a truck route, other individuals supported PGL requests to use south Brander. 

“We have how many trucks going through our town, right by our school, right by our swimming pool and it is not an issue, but when these guys want to come, put money in our community, and build something new, all of sudden everybody is up in arms. I drove 10 semis right by the school today,” said Evan Wilhelm, who is member of the local co-op in town. “Why don’t they (PGL) want to build a road down the Gardena highway and across a prairie trail? I drive the Gardena highway and it is not a heavy highway. Highway 5 is a heavy highway. Highway 5 is the highway that you have big trucks on. 

Paterson added to the discussion that PGL would do everything they could to assist in the families’ safety in these residential neighbors. 

As the end, the planning committee voted to send PGL’s list of requests to the city council for their decisions on the items.
On Monday evening, PGL requested to stay zoned as Agriculture with “Condition Use” instead of Manufacture to make sure they could conduct agricultural business on the land. 

The city stated that they would have to study the request before they could move forward and tabled the discussion until further notice.