Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 5.1 Smoking Pollution Cntrl (2) , , .~ , e CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DA IE: August 9, 1993 SUBJECT: Request from Bracy H. Elton, Ph.D. to discuss City of Dublin Ordinance 13-86 - Smoking Pollution Control (Prepared by: Bo Barker, Management Assistant) EXHIBITS ATTACHED: Aetter from Bracy Elton dated August 2,1993. RECOMMENDATION:~Receive staff report and consider Mr. Elton's concerns. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None DESCRIPTION: On August 2, 1993, Staff received a request from Mr. Bracy Elton, Ph.D., a Dublin resident, to appear before the City Council to discuss Ordinance 13-86 - Smoking Pollution Control. Mr. Elton is a resident of the Amador Lakes apartment complex. He contends he is unable to get any fresh air due to the smoking habits of the new neighbors who moved in below downstairs. Mr. Elton argues that since regulation e~ists for other forms of behavior, such as noise, the City should also regulate smoking pollution in private residences. Ordinance 13-86 only addresses smoking pollution control in public places and places of employment. Staff is unaware of any local ordinance which regulates smoking in private residences. In order to have authority in this situation, the Ordinance would require revision. Moreover, legal issues relating to the regulation smoking in private residences by local government would need further investigation. Recommendation: Receive staff report and consider Mr. Elton's concerns. CITY CLERK FILE ~ ~. ~ COPIES TO: Bracy Elton, Ph.D. I..l.~:. . o 1 P M .~ I - 0 S C ..' POl \ i OB-02-93 03 e From the Desk of Bracy H. Elton, Ph.D. 8364-G North lake Drive Dublin, CA 94568 Phone: (510) 829--7789 EXHIBIT ~ i August 2, 199:3 Kay Kec.k, City Clerk City of Dublin Dublin, CA 94568 Phone: (510) 833-6650 FAX: (510) 833.6651 " Dear Ms. Keck, The City of Dublin has adopted a "smoking pollution control ordinance" (Section 5.5G of the Dublin City Code). In it, Section 5.56.020 (Fiuding!:i and Purpose) Paragraph R ::;t,a.teiS: Accordingly, the City Council finclR and declares t.hat t.he purposes of thiR r.haptl'.r arc (1) to protect t.hfl pu hUe health aud welfare by prohibit.ing smoking in public places except in designated smoking area!:i, and by regulat.ing flnloking in phtce::; of employment; and (2) to strike a reasonable: ba.lance between the needs of Rmoker!l and t.he need of nonsmokers to hreat.he :mlOke,fl'ee air, and to recognize that, where t.hese needs conflict, t.he need to breat.he smoke-free' air nhall haVf~ prioril.y. (OnI. 13-86 S 1001) It appears from Paragraph 5.56.020.B.(2) thal it is the intent of the Cit.y COlllll:il of lhe City of Dublin to place priol'it.y on t.he need of IlOIll:Hnokcrs to breathe amoke-fr88 a,ll'.'The remainder of Section 5.56 regardR ~p(:c.ifk ,'egllla.tions coutrollinr; smokiIlI"; in puhlic p1ac.88 a,ud places of employment. Howeve,', t.hat. the ordinanc.e leaves out smoking controls at or net"r private residences, a place at. whic.h Wf> spend atlea!:it one third (1/3) of our life, app8<1,r's to violate the City Council's own stat.ed intent (Paragraph 5.56.020.H.(2)). lundcrgt.ano t.hat t.he City Council is looking into possible modificat.ionii t,o the "smoking pollution c.ontrol ordinance" and would like t.o address some situaliolls not covered by this ordinanf.e in private rf!Ridflnr.f!R. In particular, I live at the Amador LakcRApart.mcnt.R in an I.lpstajrs unit of all ei~ht.-plcx building (allunitR am "c.ornf>r" unit::!). Ou Friday, July 30, 1!}!}3, some smokerR mov0.c] int.o the unit dircdly helow. The llituation is described as followR: My pat.io oV8rlooks t.he c.lowust...tirs patio. So, when someone smokes on the dOWnflt.airR pat.io, t.he smoke c,o,n (and doe::;) enter my apartment if lIlY patio door is open. 1 abhor cigarett.e Rmoke: it. makcfi me nalISp.at.p.d, iiW] it. and its Rmell can end up permeating my household belongings, rugs, furniture, amI clothes. (1 a.lso (Lvoid smoke heca.lJsp. it it'! a hea.lth ha:tard.) Of course, were I home I could close my windowf.l and my patio doOl', at. the expell::lt.! of ,1'uel!lpt.iug to p.njoy fresll air. Were lllot PU~ To Kay Keck, City Clerk August 2, 1993 Page 2 , .. -02-93 03 02PM FR .DSC e home the .moke and its odor would invade Iny home and when were to mme home and close the doors and window" I would be kept Irom ventilating the affected belonging' and forced to breathe smoke-pollnted air and smell smoke. polluted belongings and feel nall,iated. In addition, the air conditioning/heating unit, that ,erve each of our apartments are situated atnp each other. AlI,hongh separated by my floor (and their ceiling), the AC/H unit, abo share some air space since their respective drainage pipes adjoin inside the building, (The pipes drain condensed moisture that accumulates inside the air mndit,ioning/heating unit,) . So, at times smoke or other ,"spended particle, can enteI my unit even with the windows and doors closed. . ~ : 1 did discuss the .ituation wit,h my apartm.nt manager who indicated that all t,hat ,h. could do w.. to offer to relocate me (at my expense, by the way) elsewhere on the property, However, t,hare would be nO guarantee that a similar situation would not occur at the new location noW or in the future, I also inquired ahollt designating some units .. "nonsmoking", The reply wa.' that there w.. nothing that the apartment management could do legally in this direction. (I do not know whether this is in fact trlle or false.) I will also be writing to the management r.ompany of the Amador Lakes Apartments on t,be whole malter, The City of Duhlin has recognized health hazard, of ,eeoudha.ud ,lOok. and that some individual, may have to take periodic sick leave br.cauae of adverse reactions to secondhand smoke (Section 5.56.020, paragraphs A.3, AA, and B). I would suppose that such sick leave might he taken at an individual's private residenr.c. However, there is appears to be no items in the Dublin City Code to r.ontrol this pollutant aud irritant in/near private. residences. I'ur- thermorc, t.here are other ordinances controlling other nuisanCes, e.g" noise pollution, visual pollution (run-down property and huildings, parking of certain vehidr~ on private property), These apply to two of the five (5) senses. Perhap' t.hore could also be some consideration for the olfactory capacities and for clean air on private property. Such consideration might in- clude the dr.signation of nonsmoking and ,making are.. in closely situated private ",_,idenr..', e.g., apartment complexe., condominiums, and duplexes, It might also include modificatio". to t,he Building Code to require and enforce pneurnalic separation of ventilation systems, I have sarno ide.. for expanding the ,moldng pollution control ordinance and would like tbe opportunity t,o .peak on thi. issue in front of the Dublln City Council at its next meeting on August 9, 1993. 'Tha.nk you for your lime. and consideration in this maUer. Sincerely, n, Ph.D.