Post on 31-Dec-2015
description
Planning & Community Development
Recycling Facilities
City Council MeetingFebruary 25, 2013
Planning & Community Development
Moratorium
On February 4, 2013, the City Council directed staff to prepare an interim urgency ordinance to temporarily prohibit:•The establishment of new recycling facilities; •The expansion or modification of existing facilities; and•The resumption of discontinued legal nonconforming recycling centers.
2
Planning & Community Development
Interim Urgency Ordinance
• An interim urgency ordinance establishing a moratorium has been prepared as requested.> Purpose: The moratorium provides an opportunity to
determine what regulations are necessary to eliminate or reduce impacts and to further understand applicable State laws;
> Applicability: No new recycling centers; no expansion of existing; no re-establishment if existing facilities are discontinued.
> Exceptions: No exceptions to this moratorium are proposed.> Processing: No applications will be accepted or processed
during the moratorium (exclusion for immediate fire, life safety concerns).
3
Planning & Community Development
Conclusion/Recommendation
• Make environmental findings required by CEQA;
• Adopt an interim urgency ordinance with findings;
• Direct staff to prepare permanent revisions to the ordinance as outlined in report, with Planning Commission and public input.
4
Planning & Community Development
Recycling Facilities
Planning & Community Development
Overview
• The City Council identified impacts associated with Recycling Facilities;
• The City Council has requested that staff amend existing regulations and, to address immediate concerns, has directed staff to prepare an interim urgency ordinance to prevent new facilities from being established;
• The City Council also requested information regarding the City’s existing recycling program.
6
Planning & Community Development
Background
• On December 5, 2012, The Economic Development and Technology Committee (EdTech) of the City Council discussed Recycling Facilities at a publicly noticed meeting.>The public expressed concerns regarding the secondary
impacts of these facilities, including: Accumulation of trash and debris; Noise; Loitering; Traffic congestion; Transient activity; Public drunkenness; and General property upkeep.
7
Planning & Community Development
Background (continued)
• The EdTech Committee directed staff to amend the City’s existing regulations to eliminate or mitigate negative impacts associated with these uses.
• On February 4, 2013, the City Council further discussed the matter and concurred with the EdTech’s recommendation to amend the existing regulations;
• Recognizing the potential current and immediate threat to the public safety and welfare, the City Council directed staff to return with a moratorium on such uses;
• The City Council asked staff present information regarding the City’s curbside recycling program and applicable State Laws.
8
Planning & Community Development
Curbside Recycling Program
• The City provides a curbside recycling program for residential customers;
• It is estimated that theft of residential recyclables costs the City $30,000/Yr;
• The City offers lockable blue bins - $1.40/Mo;• 196 customers use them (0.7%);• To provide the City’s 27,500 residential customers
lockable bins - $2.6M (4%/Mo/Customer);• PW and PD have recently established new and
effective enforcement operations to address theft.
9
Planning & Community Development
State Law
• The City Council inquired whether or not recycling facilities could be banned;
• Staff is exploring state law requirements regarding recycling facilities within certain distances of beverage distribution facilities, such as grocery stores;
• Recycling facilities are governed by the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act;
• Additional staff research is required to fully understand the matter.
10
Planning & Community Development
Ordinance Revisions
• Standards for classifying ‘Large’ and ‘Small’ facilities (500SF versus 200SF);
• Standards for distance/separation requirements;
• Design Review;• Property Maintenance• Hours of operation;• New standard conditions;• Application to new and existing facilities;
11
Planning & Community Development
Location of Recycling Centers
12
Food4Less 1329 N.
LakerePlanet
Vons 1390 N. Allen
NexCycle
Ralphs3601 N. Foothill
rePlanetRalphs160 N. Lake
rePlanet
Vons665 N. Fair
OaksNexCycle
2
1
3
45
Beverage Container Recycling Centers
1Ralphs 160 N. Lake (rePlanet)2Food4Less 1329 N. Lake (rePlanet)3Vons 1390 N. Allen (NexCycle)4Ralphs 3601 N. Foothill (rePlanet)5Vons 665 N. Fair Oaks (NexCycle)
Planning & Community Development
Existing Facilities
Name Address Name of MarketHave
MCUP?
Legal Non conforming
Use?
rePLANET LLC
160 N. Lake Ave.
Ralph’s (Lake and Walnut)
No Yes
NexCycle 665 N. Fair Oaks Ave.
Von’s (Fair Oaks and Orange Grove)
No* Yes
rePLANET LLC
1329 N. Lake Ave.
Food For Less (Lake and Washington)
No Yes
NexCycle1390 N. Allen Ave.
Von’s (Allen and Washington)
No Yes
rePLANET LLC
3601 Foothill Blvd.
Ralph’s (Foothill and Rosemead)
No Yes
13
*Application Pending to change hours of operation
Planning & Community Development
Existing Facilities
14
• All five existing recycling centers were established prior to the City’s requirement to obtain a Minor Conditional Use permit and are considered to be Legal Non-Conforming Uses (“grandfathered”).
• Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.71.040, a non-conforming use may be continued and maintained, provided that there is no addition, alteration, or enlargement of the use.
Planning & Community Development
Existing Regulations
• Since there are no conditions of approval regulating these uses, they are governed by general property maintenance regulations;
• Some issues that the PMC deals with generically for all uses in the City include:> Accumulations of litter, debris and junk > Excessive noise> Odors causing discomfort or annoyance> Unsanitary, unsightly or blighted conditions detrimental to the
public
15
Planning & Community Development
Code Compliance Process
• When a use is in violation of general property maintenance requirements:
> 1st Violation: Business is warned> 2nd and Subsequent Violations: Citations ranging from $104 –
1,044> Further Violations: Code Enforcement Commission to require
corrective measures> City Prosecutor: Fines, abatement, other penalties
16
Planning & Community Development
Existing Centers
• Existing Problems with Recycling Centers:
>Loitering >Trash/Debris>Drinking alcohol in public>Noise
17
Planning & Community Development
Potential Solutions to Existing Problems
• Change existing standards in ordinance:>Reduce hours of operation;>Increase distance requirements;>Regulate hours of pickup;>Require specific site maintenance standards;
• These changes would address future uses, but would not affect existing operators.
18
Planning & Community Development
Potential Solutions to Existing Problems
• Amendments to Affect Existing Operators>Explore the City’s ability to require existing uses
to obtain a CUP within a specific period of time and comply with regulations governing these uses – [City of Alhambra has adopted a similar ordinance].
>Potential ordinance changes should balance the City’s desire to protect and preserve neighborhoods while allowing for the promotion of sustainable practices (including recycling).
19