P&M Recycling is challenging a city order to stop operations out of its Sixth Avenue warehouse.

P&M owner Pat McInroy appeared before city council Monday night.

He defended his application for an amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP) that would permit P&M to continue the storage and processing operations out of the warehouse.

In November 2015, P&M was issued the order to cease operations at that building by last Friday.

The recycling operations were found to be in contravention of the property’s mixed-use commercial zoning.

As it’s stated in the order signed by planning manager Pat Ross: “When the property was zoned CM2, there was a non-conforming use present on the site.

“However, such non-conforming use at the time of implementation of the CM2 does not now permit the use of the property for a recycling business. No development permits has been issued for this use and no business licence has been obtained for the operations of a recycling business at this location.”

Ross recognized that McInroy has continued operating from the facility in spite of the order.

However, since the business owner is in the appeal process, pursuing the OCP change, Ross took no issue with the continued operations.

As McInroy explained in his presentation to council, the situation has come about in part due to growth in his business, though that has slowed down in recent months.

He noted that between 2011 and 2015, P&M’s shipped tonnage of recyclable waste rose by 350 per cent.

Initially, P&M rented out space in the building that then belonged to the Boys and Girls Club of Yukon, to store an expanding amount of cardboard that was coming in.

“We were getting tight on space,” McInroy said of the company’s Ray Street depot, where residents drop off their recycling.

McInroy bought the Sixth Avenue building in 2014 to store and separate recyclables.

When his competitor, the Raven Recycling Society, closed its doors to non-refundable recyclables for several months beginning in October 2014, P&M continued to accept both refundables and non-refundables.

“We saw a crazy amount of material coming our way,” McInroy said.

Acknowledging that while he was not happy about the appearance outside the building, with numerous recyclables piling up, he could not “turn a blind eye” to the need for non-refundable recycling in the city to have somewhere to go.

During that time, he said, the company dealt with both the city’s bylaw and fire department, with the recycling now down to acceptable levels.

Raven has since began accepting non-refundables again. And, given the situation with the large amount of recycling, P&M and a private recycling hauler, Whitehorse Blue Bin Recycling, have parted ways.

Whitehorse Blue Bin Recycling had been bringing the recycling it collects to P&M.

The two companies ended their agreement amicably. The blue bin company now takes the recycling collected to Raven. And that means less pressure on P&M’s operations at the Sixth Avenue warehouse.

“It has slowed down a lot,” McInroy said.

The seven-day-per-week operations from the facility are no longer, with a typical work week for the Sixth Avenue site now being Tuesday to Saturday.

Under questioning from council, McInroy confirmed that if the order to cease operations is enforced, he would be unable to operate out of the facility in processing and storing material.

He also said he is open to discussions about potentially swapping land with the city should a more suitable location for his business be found.

Throughout his presentation, McInroy cited the city’s goal of diverting waste from the landfill and the role P&M plays in that.

As planning manager Ross explained later in the meeting though, there is a challenge in finding such a space in a more industrial area, as P&M requires a building along with the land.

There is also an added challenge in that the warehouse is close to the company’s drop-off depot, which currently makes it easy for staff to move between the two locations.

After listening to McInroy’s presentation, council also heard from resident Chris Isaak.

He spoke on behalf of his family and his parents who live in the same area.

Pointing to a significant amount of work done to landscape the families’ yards, he said the dust, noise, and the blocking of driveways by machinery and the like have caused an exhausting amount of frustration and stress for residents.

Recyclable waste often ends up on or near residential properties, he said.

“This mess renews itself almost daily,” Isaak commented, adding the dust in the area has taken on a toll on his mother, who suffers from asthma.

Plans to put in garden suites have also been “derailed” due to the situation, he said.

Isaak added, though, that McInroy has done his best to work with the family on the issues, but the situation seems impossible to control.

The warehouse operation should be located in an industrial area, he emphasized.

Under further questioning from council, Isaak said his issue is with the warehouse alone and not the Ray Street depot.

The latter facility is in full compliance as an existing non-conforming use. (That means the operation was in place before zoning was changed and can therefore continue to operate.)

Isaak went on to describe the Ray Street operation as being “quite well-managed.”

In bringing forward his report on the proposed OCP amendment, Ross took an unusual move: he recommended that council defeat it at first reading and that the order to cease operations be enforced.

Typically when an OCP amendment is proposed, city staff recommend it move forward at least past first reading to allow for public input.

As Ross explained, in this case, the proposal “directly collides” with the OCP. It’s therefore the position of city staff that first reading should be defeated.

Ross’ report goes on to point out the mixed-use – residential/commercial designation of the property in the OCP – does not contemplate recycling as a use.

Recycling, it was noted, is incompatible with the mixed-use character of the neighbourhood.

“The subject lot is immediately adjacent to numerous residential properties, a hotel and several commercial businesses,” the report states.

“The industrial nature of the recycling business in this location has led to numerous complaints being received by the city and there is a detailed history of incompatibility with different land uses in the area.”

Ross also acknowledged the city’s waste diversion goals, stating: “The OCP includes policies aimed at achieving zero waste in the City of Whitehorse.

“These policies include developing waste diversion programs and encouraging recycling programs and diversion credit programs.

“However, while the OCP supports recycling operations within the city, they should be located in appropriate areas and developed subject to applicable zoning regulations.”

Concerns about fire safety have also been expressed by the city’s fire prevention office.

They include the adequacy of the building’s sprinkler system and the close proximity of outdoor storage to overhead power lines.

As Mayor Dan Curtis said in an interview following the meeting, the issue is a challenging one.

He would not comment on how he might vote on the matter next week.

Last night’s meeting was a chance to consider the issue with the vote still another week away.

“We have to follow due process,” he said.

Questioned about the various issues being faced in the matter – zoning and OCP designations versus waste diversion – Curtis noted that if the city order to cease operations stands, he would like to see work continue between the city and P&M to find a more appropriate location for the company to continuing warehousing and processing material.

“I’m optimistic,” he said.

If, on the other hand, council votes to move forward with first reading of the OCP change next week, a public hearing on the matter would be scheduled for council’s Feb. 22 meeting.

A report on the hearing would follow on March 7, with second reading coming forward March 14.

If that passes, like any OCP amendment, approval by the territorial minister is then required.

With a 45-day period set aside for that, third reading wouldn’t likely come back to council until May 9.

Coun. Dan Boyd was absent from last night’s council meeting.