CCMIN061609 - Laserfiche WebLink

17. Consider introduction of an ordinance adding Chapter 9.21 to the Pleasanton Municipal Code regarding construction and demolition debris Mr. Bocian gave the staff report, stating about two years ago, StopWaste.org indicated that as a condition for receipt of mitigation funding there were five steps it wanted cities to take; one step was to implement a C&D ordinance. Staff has worked on the matter over the past year which is based upon a model ordinance used by StopWaste.org. Staff made some changes and the ordinance requires that 90% of cement and 50% of all other materials involved in a construction or demolition project be recycled. The project threshold limits are $125,000 for construction and $25,000 for demolitions. He said the ordinance has details about what recyclable and refuse materials are. When an applicant is involved and exceeds the limits, they are required to prepare a Waste Management Plan (WMP) which outlines the types of materials on the project, the amount of material recycled, the amount projected to be landfill, and the projected diversion rate with the understanding that the WMP will be required to show that the applicant will meet the intent of the ordinance. If it does, the applicant moves forward to continue in its planning and obtains a building permit. Prior to the certificate of occupancy or final sign-off on a project, the contractor/applicant is required to provide information that indicates it met goals outlined in the WMP. There are three levels of compliance or non-compliance that the ordinance sets forth: 1) Full compliance means the applicant met all requirements set forth in the WMP or more specifically, met the requirements of the ordinance; 2) A good faith compliance process is a process where the applicant would demonstrate to the City that it made every attempt to meet what is set forth in the WMP but for some reason, it was unable to completely do so. An example is a particular product on-site that could be recycled but there exists no market for; and therefore, it would have to be land- filled. Good faith compliance is determined by the compliance officer, which in most cases is the City’s Chief Building Official; and 3) Non-compliance—the applicant does not meet the target or does not try to comply, at which point the applicant would not be advanced through the permit process. The applicant would have to return and try to generate records which show what was recycled or if there was still debris on the project, it would need to be recycled and documented. There is also a provision for the applicant to have an opportunity to appeal a non-compliance situation to the compliance officer and ultimately to the City Manager. There could also be an exemption, where an unusual situation exists where for whatever reason the construction project does not lend itself to recycle material. In this case, the compliance officer could determine the project as exempt. Hazardous materials are dealt with separately in the ordinance, which is an example of non-recyclable material. Councilmember Sullivan questioned if the process matched the StopWaste.org ordinance. Mr. Bocian said it does, except some cities are recommending the applicant/contractor post a bond. In the event there was non-compliance, the City could retain this bond. He said some cities have not done this and based upon conversations with StopWaste.org, staff decided not to include it because it is a considerable administrative process and can lead to issues in moving forward. The general intent of the ordinance is not to be punitive, but for the applicant to go through a process to identify diversion and demonstrate that the diversion goals were met. If the City went through the appeals process, chances are that the certificate of occupancy could be issued but the applicant is faced with considerable time and money moving through a lengthy appeal process. Staff wants the process to be user-friendly, easy to understand, and to have the applicant try to recycle as much as possible. Even for projects that do not meet the financial City Council Minutes Page 11 of 13 June 16, 2009