HomeMy WebLinkAbout- - ZA-89-25 & ZA-92-10 (12) - 10/19/2010G.arci.a
Center
Recycl.*ing
Planning Commission Meeting
August 9, aoio
•According to CMMC § 13-29(0)(1:):'
"the planning commission may require' the modification or
revocation of any planning application andJor. pursue
� other legal remedies as may be deemed appropriate by the
�., city attorney, if the planning commission finds that the
use as operated or maintained:
a. Constitutes a public nuisance as defined in State Civil
Code Sections 3479 and 3480; or
b. Does not comply with the conditions of approval."
LSM
Definition of Nuisance
• Civ. Code § 3479 states:
"Anything which is injurious to health, including, but
not limited to, the illegal sale of controlled ,substances,
y oris indecent or offensive to the senses, or an
s
obstruction to the free use of property, so as to
interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or
property, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or
use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or
river, bay, stream, canal, or basin, or any public park,
square, street, or highway, is a nuisance:'
v
Definition of Nuisance
• Civ. Code § 348o states:
`A public nuisance is one which affects, at the same
time an entire community or neighborhood, or any
considerable number of persons, although the extent
of the annoyance or damage inflicted upon individuals
`� may be unequal.
Legal Standards re: Revocation
Goat Hill Tavern v. City of Costa Mesa, 6
Cal.AppAth 1519 (1992)
• "Once a use permit
> been vraverly issued the
1 J
)ower of a municipality to revolze it is limited. Of
course, if the permittee does nothing beyond
� obtaining the permit it maybe revolted. Where a
permit has been properly obtained and in reliance
thereon the permittee has incurred material expense,
he acquires a vested property right to the protection
of which he is entitled:'
Legal Stanaaras.-re: KevUcaLiu1 1
Goat Hill. Tavern v. City of Costa Mesa, 6
Cal.AppAth 15.19 (1992)
• When a permittee has acquired such a vested right it
may be revoked if the permittee
• fails to comply with reasonable terms or conditions
expressed in the permit granted; or
• if there is a compelling public necessity.
in public necessit warranting the
• 'A compelling p y
revocation o
atif a use permit for a lawful business may exist
were the conduct of that business constitutes a.
nuisance."
Evidence of Nuisance
• Letter dated November 17, i99a signed by 7 individuals
re: Garcia Recycling complaining of
• De-epreciation of homes
• Transients (drunkards sleep, urinate, and leave trash
� hiding beside the trash centers)
Odors, unkempt areas, and unnecessary noise and trash
*Note that this letter was written prior to Garcia
Recycling's relocation to the front of the parking lot
away from the residents.
Evidence -of Nuisance*,
• Undated letter signed by approximately 35 individuals
urging the City to revoke Garcia Recycling's use permit
stating:
• 118 years since the City ignored their ig92 cornplaints
• Same complaints are still applicable
s' •Transients (drunkards asleep all around, urinating, trash)
• Odors, unkempt areas, unnecessarynoise; trash
Evidence of Nuisance
• Emails from Smart & Final dated -July �7-8, Zolo. Refers
to a complaint letter that is not attached.
• "The last thin I would want is all of the transients
walking through our store with recycling leaking and
causing a mess, and causing security issues.
• "I wanted to take some pictures and send in to show the
amount of recycling this center does on a dally basis.
• "As you can see, it is a very busy center and removing
it would not be good for local businesses."
• "... it is obvious that a center at this location is an
absolute necessity."
Counter -evidence o.f'Nuisance
• Letter from Victor Bonilla dated July 21, 2010, part owner
and property manager of shopping center housing Garcia
Recycling stating:
• He has not received complaints re: Garcia Recycling
operations
s • All that is visible from the street is the front of the truck and
the .back of an unmarked container, and there is even. a tree
blocking this view."
• Garcia Recycling does not bring in transients, there. is a soup
kitchen across the street
• Garcia Recycling keeps its facility clean and its employees are
constantly sweeping the area and picking up any litter
__ —a- .... . x-Y'-=�_ r �,�.y�. _ y_,. _..a�:... n. — '�i `�5'�JmG�C .." _ °_ _ _ '4.•�_:+:[y_i_Ja�::x z�.� v � v 1• ul i
:�s — - - ~±iC.J1'�L���r""i �" <.� —��-.tip.-.-rte _ �:���•��3.- € _ �� �.� � a t , i r ;
�^ o _ x- {V K;-�"'"�"' •+' � L .+k 'i .. i� '� � 5 3='r� � •s'L�i.rk �"a'_sJ +h k ,a'. i r s r' -.cn t
y V a. , v �- Vf��'i�v+14`�"��. "��"y�•��.� _ `' � i p 6 <�� _ms'`..:µ, Yb��� �` 4 ^tom%{1�^` .e^�5 t
•�_ �i s a r �.,:?i& "tie.+ � � . .. ,.
F-2
..�.
Counter-Evidence of-'.N,,, _
uisance
• He and his. tenants have not found the noise to be
offensiveiven the location of the � o eration in the
g p
p�
arkin lot.: *He has not received complaints about
noise from his customers.
• Garcia Recycling is located in an area of the. arkin lot
that does not cause a dlsruptlon� to customers or the
g
nei hborin businesses
neighboring
Counter -Evidence of Nuisance
• Letter from neighboring businesses datedjUly 21, .2010
stating:
• Garcia Recycling has not disrupted their businesses.
• They are not offended by the appearance of Garcia
sRecycling's operations, nor have they complained about
any noise, litter, or homeless individuals
• Unfair to blame Garcia Recycling for homeless when
there is a soup kitchen across the street
Photos —Garcia Recycling
View from street driving by
'hotos —Garcia Kecycling
f�
Z
H
F
. .
b
S
Photos —Garcia
Recycling
View from street driving by
Photos -Garcia Recycling
Residents walking to Garcia Recycling
Photos — NexCycle/Microsit.e
-,*hotos' Earthw'ize'.
i
Photos - Earthwize
Boa d of Direclon.v
Arlene Schafer
Robert Ooten
Gcuy Monahan
Arthur Perry
James Fer i'Man
Staff
Scott C..Carroll
General Manager
R6bin B. Harners
District Engineer
(949) 631-1731
Joun Revak
Office Manager
Clerk of thee District
Alan R. Baa•ns
Legal :Counsel
kfa cus D. Davis
Tt•easu er
Phone
(949) 645-8400
Fax
(94P) '650-2253
Address
628 4Y 191,h Stl•ew
Costa Mesa CA
92627-2716
zA- 9a-�o
Costa Mes_ anjtaTV
. , . an 1-depenrbent Special District
August 9, 2010
Planning Commission
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, GA 92626
Dear Commissioners:
-With. regard to -the disposition of Costa Mesa residents waste, the
Costa Mesa Sanita.ry District does. indeed recycle resident's
waste and the materials are diverted from landfills. The following
is the process:
The District's trash hauler, CR&R, Inc., picks up the materials on
collection day and the materials are taken directly to the Materials
Recovery Facility (MRF) located in. Stanton. After delivery., the
recyclabies are sorted by hand and then separated by type,
washed (if appropriate), compacted, baled and prepared for sale
on the open market.
Should you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Scott Carroll
General Manager
Olor �13
�� Priiireil cul Pmted* ow.CQN4.1311f od's'b soAGi..-nmte G{F7R.mWer CAIIPm6n-6LM. W' P.6.
Recycled Paper
wwtv:crosaca.g.ov
Received
City of Costa Mesa
Development Sefvices department
AUG 1.8 2010.
CITY OF COSTA MESA
Department of Public Services / Engineering
INTER OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Patrick Bauer, Associate Engineer
DATE: August 27, 2010
SUBJECT: GARCIA RECYCLING — 739 W. 19TH STREET, COSTA MESA
A meeting was held on August 18, 2010, by Development Services and Public Services
staff., with Commissioners Jim Fitzpatrick and Stephen Mensinger to discuss concerns
expressed by Commissioner Fitzpatrick relative to potential water quality violations at
the above location. At the meeting the Commissioners requested staff to provide the
following information outlining findings of staff's investigation regarding the Garcia
Recycling operations and practices as they pertain to water quality requirements.
Garcia Recycling operates a collection facility for plastic bottles, aluminum cans and
glass bottles in the parking lot at 739 W. 19th Street. This business has operated at this
location since November 6 1989.
To prepare this report, staff reviewed complaint history and. visited the location on
various occasions to observe their ongoing practice.
During staffs visits it was observed that recyclable materials at this facility are unloaded
by customers into mesh bins. Once weighed, the material is separated into barrels and
loaded into a truck or a container that remains permanently at the location. As
recyclable materials were placed in the mesh bins small amounts of residue were
allowed to fall on the ground and were subsequently swept and collected in plastic
containers lined with plastic bags. Rubber squeegees were used by Garcia's staff to
collect spilled materials and to contain it in the immediate area of the mesh bins.
Staff also inspected the equipment, namely a truck used . to remove some of the
recyclables. at, the end...of. the . day, and -_a permanent storage container kept. on .site.
Staff found there were no leaks, or evidence of previous leaks of liquid residues or
engine fluids from either the truck or the permanent container.
Staff canvassed the entire area of operation, and found no evidence of any discharge
of materials or putrescible waste leaving the site. No evidence was found of any liquids
from this operation reaching the gutters on 19th Street.
Current Best Management Practices (BMPs) being utilized at the location by the
operator include:
• The collection site is continuously swept of any solid debris or waste.
• All bins, scales and containers used during the day are placed into the onsite
container or in the truck that is removed from the site at the end of the shift.
• The collection area is cleaned with approximately 5 gallons of water and
Lemon Scent Simple Green to assist in cleaning and removal of any dried
liquids that may accumulate on the ground. The collection area is then
scrubbed with a stiff bristled broom.
• Waste water resulting form the cleaning operation is collected utilizing a
rubber squeegee, and it is then collected in a waste barrel lined with a plastic
bag, and subsequently removed from the location. See Attachment "A" for a
sequence of photos portraying the clean up methods.
Costa Mesa Municipal Code, Tile VIII, Chapter 3, Section 8-30 (t); (Attachment "B")
Definition of a Prohibited Discharge states:
Prohibited discharge shall mean any discharge which contains any pollutant from public
or private property to:
(i) the stormwater drainage system;
(ii) any upstream flow, which is tributary to. the stormwater drainage system;
(iii) any groundwater, river, stream, creek, wash or dry weather arroyo, wetlands.
area, marsh, coastal slough, or
(iv) any coastal harbor, bay, or the Pacific Ocean.
The term prohibited discharge shall not include discharges allowable under the
discharge exception.
A historical analysis of the location .indicated no reports or observations of discharges of
liquids into the public right-of-way over the last 5 years. There is no history of water
quality complaints received over the same period of time; and there is no history of
water quality violations on record for this operation.
Attachment A: Cleaning Process Photos
Attachment B:. Costa Mesa Municipal Code, Title VIII, Chapter 3, .Section. .
8-30 (t)
c: Allan Roeder, City Manager
Kim Barlow, City Attorney
Peter Naghavi, Director, Department of Public Services
Kim Brandt, Director, Development Services Department
Ernesto Munoz, City Engineer
2
F..,anina Proce
Costa Mesa Municipal Code, Title Viii, Chapter 3, Section
3=30
(t)Prohibited discharge shall mean any discharge which contains any pollutant,
from public or private property to (i) the stormwater drainage system; (ii) any.
upstream flow, which is tributary to the stormwater drainage system; (iii) any
groundwater, river, stream, creek, wash or dry weather arroyo, wetlands area,
marsh, coastal slough, or (iv) any coastal harbor, bay, or the Pacific Ocean. The
term prohibited discharge shall not include discharges allowable under the
discharge exception.
IAC)
Attachnnent B