EAST PROVIDENCE — The City of East Providence, through one of its inspectors, issued a cease and desist order for the controversial TLA-Pond View recycling plant located on Dexter Avenue near the expanded waterfront district.
The order, penned by Zoning Department inspector Edward Pimentel, reads Pond View “be advised that this offlce has confirmed that signage advertising a new business at the above- referenced property has been introduced without the benefit of a requisite building permit.
“Furthermore, the referenced signage, in addition to an advertisement in the 30-31 January 2013, edition of the East Providence Post, is acknowledging presence of an operation engaged in the purchase of various metals and appliances. This office is not aware of the referenced business seeking a Certificate of Zoning or completing the requisite Change of Tenancy form, to evidence the appropriateness of said
“Purely based on the description of the operation from the on-site signage and advertisement, this office has sought a detennination of the Waterfront Executive Director, as to its appropriateness within the Dexter Road Sub-district. The referenced determination is attached for your review. It has been concluded that the operation is in fact a prohibited land use, pursuant to Sections 19-481 and 19-96 of the City of East Providence Zoning Ordinance.
“Therefore, please refrain from engaging in the afore-mentioned business. Should said business be already in operation, you are hereby directed to immediately cease all actions and remove all materials and equipment associated with said business.”
TLA-Pond View and neighbors in the Rumford section of the city have been at odds for the last several years as the recycling plant allegedly began to increase the amount of debris it took in and continued to operate despite overtures from the State Department of Environmental Management.
TLA-Pond View eventually fell into receivership. An auction of most of its machinery and product was conducted late last year. Ken Foley, who retained ownership of the property below the facility, was supposed to be part of the clean-up operations of the land.Add to favorites