My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 75230
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1970-1979
>
1975
>
RES 75230
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/23/2001 7:55:37 PM
Creation date
3/30/2000 4:56:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
10/28/1975
DOCUMENT NO
RES 75230
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
AND, clarify ."Landfill Sites-Policies" #1, pg. VIII-2, <br />as 'follows: <br /> <br />"1. Land is a valuable natural resource. Onl. y <br />lands designated in the Solid Waste Plan and in <br />the General Plan as being suitable for a disposal <br />site according to the Solid Waste Plan's prelim- <br />inary criteria should be considered as sites and <br />and these must be subjected to a critical review <br />before approval as a site." <br /> <br />(2) <br /> <br />(3) <br /> <br />add a policy statement stating precisely that those areas <br />designated "Q" within the Amador-Livermore Valley are not <br />suitable for use as disposal sites. <br /> <br />Add as a policy on pgo VIII-2 that landfill sites be located <br />only in areas where possible degradation would not affect <br />a municipal water supply. <br /> <br />Add as a policy on pg. VIII-2 that future landfill sites <br />be located outside cities' spheres of influence. <br /> <br />Finance <br /> <br />Although not set forth as a policy, language in the plan refers <br />to solid waste as acounty-wide problem. The public financing <br />methods proposed contain no mention of whether the costs borne <br />are to be county-wide or allocated to those areas served by the <br />facility. Because pleasanton may not be able to utilize the <br />resource-recovery systems proposed until after the year 2000 <br />(in two of the five 1990 schemes Pleasant0n is projected to use <br />only landfill disposal), it would seem unreasonable for pleasanton's <br />residents to have to pay for the recovery systems serving the Bay <br />Plain. Pleasanton feels that methods to reduce disposal should' <br />be undertaken and recommends that it too be included in these <br />plans. The valley planning unit is likely to be the site of any <br />major landfill serving the Bay Plan and thus the Valley's resi- <br />dents would suffer the intangible costs of landfilling - the air <br />pollution and noise from the trucks, the odor, the unsightliness, <br />and the potential degradation of its water supply. To pay for <br />the recovery systems it won't be able to use would be inequitable. <br /> <br />Recommended Change <br /> <br /> (1) Add as a policy to "Policy Recommendation - Funding and <br /> Financing, pg. VIII-18, a statement that those areas <br /> served by a Solid Waste facility should carry the burden <br /> of its financing. <br /> <br />-3- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.