PC 032702 - Laserfiche WebLink

r- Commissioner Sullivan stated that he thinks staff and the Waste Management Authority has done an excellent job putting together a plan based on the franchise requirements. He noted that he wants to see the program succeed, but he is bothered that it will cost too much to implement and that it will not be fair to developers. Commissioner Arkin advised that he has the same concerns as Commissioner Sullivan, noting that he would like to hear from members of the public regarding the costs due to the franchise agreement with PGS and those in the open market. Mr. Fialho advised that the residential and commercial rates are pretty competitive, with the residential rates being one of the cheapest in the Tri-Valley, and the commercial rates being in the middle. In response to an inquiry from Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Fialho advised that the franchise with PGS goes back to the early 80's. Commissioner Harvey asked if the ordinance could supersede the agreement with PGS if the amount of materials an applicant wants to recycle exceeds PGS' s capacity to do so and the applicant would be able to go to a third party. Ms. Seto advised that the franchise agreement is a contract and it cannot be superseded by simply adopting a different ordinance. She noted that this would be a breach of the contract. She also noted that additional remedies need to be explored to address the Planning Commission's comments and concerns. Ms. Maier provided information regarding projects on which a condition requiring 50% of the waste diversion has been placed. She advised that she has not received any complaints that it is r-. too costly to accomplish the requirement and that a lot of developers are using the exception to allow subcontractors to off-haul materials that they bring to the project. In response to an inquiry from Chairperson Maas, Ms. Maier reported on the other exceptions to the franchise agreement that are allowed. Commissioner Sullivan questioned how the qualifying thresholds that have been set for project participation were determined. Ms. Maier reported on factors used in setting these thresholds. Commissioner Harvey asked ifthe ordinance only addresses recycling and whether it does any thing to provide incentives for the overall reduction of waste. Ms. Maier advised that the ordinance really only addresses what happens to the waste once it is generated. Commissioner Roberts stated that she is not happy with the $102 per square foot assessment for custom homes in that she feels it is not sufficient to get compliance from some people. Ms. Seto advised that there is an issue of uniformity with the values set forth in the Building Code and it would create a difficult situation to use different valuations within different programs in the City. r- Commissioner Harvey asked if it would be possible to include incentives in the ordinance for reducing overall waste. He noted that he would rather see a developer generate half of the overall waste with zero recycling, than a project that generates twice the waste and 50% of that waste recycled. He noted that his fundamental problem with the ordinance is that it allows a developer to generate as much waste as it wants, as long as half of it is recycled. Ms. Seto noted PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 27,2002 Page 7