Laserfiche WebLink
199 <br /> <br />This had been placed on hold while staff had been seeking to <br />finalize the recycling permit at Pleasanton Garbage Service and <br />apply to the State for an exemption from the requirement that every <br />shopping center would have to have its own small recycling <br />facility. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver asked what staff response was to Mr. Moss' <br />accusation that he was being unfairly treated. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift answered that staff took the position that it was <br />attempting to receive the exemption from the state law so that the <br />City could then essentially remove most of the small recycling <br />facilities, not all of the facilities because they are not all <br />within the right distance of Pleasanton Garbage Center. Staff <br />believed that once this took place the City would move to have any <br />remaining ones screened. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta stated that Mr. DeTata (Code Enforcement Officer) <br />has had great success in getting some of the facilities screened. <br />Some facilities had been some relocated and/or removed. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer asked if a dumpster would be considered a <br />recycling center. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that the few dumpsters seen around town were <br />not small recycling facilities. The City had taken the position <br />that those that were going to be used as recycling centers do fall <br />under the ordinance and therefore, would have to be screened. The <br />intent of this Code was to make these facilities more presentable, <br />not to hide them. It would also provide a place where signage <br />could legitimately be placed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr referred to the comment that the City was not allowed <br />to screen these facilities any longer and asked what the accuracy <br />was in the State negating the City's police powers to enforce <br />public health and safety. <br /> <br /> Mr. Beougher explained that AB 939 did not infringe the City's <br />land use law therefore, the screening request is legal. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta explained that Michael Roush, City Attorney, had <br />been involved with this issue from the beginning and has concluded <br />that the City was not applying the ordinance discriminately. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Mohr, and seconded by Ms. Scribner, that <br />Resolution No. 92-81 be adopted, denying the appeal of a decision <br />of the Planning Commission to revoke a use permit for a small <br />recycling collection facility located at 2803 Hopyard Road for <br />failure to comply with conditions of approval. Zoning for the <br />property is C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) District. <br /> <br />4/21/92 9 <br /> <br /> <br />