HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/27/2012 - WASTE STREAM STUDY AND INTEGRATED RECYCLING FACILIDATE: March 27, 2012
STAFF: Bruce Hendee
Susie Gordon
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Waste Stream Study and Integrated Recycling Facility.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To help reach the community’s goal of diverting 50% of the waste stream from landfills, the City
examined what continues to be disposed of as trash. Section 1 of a draft Waste Stream Study
provides a characterization of Fort Collins’ discarded materials.
A second report identifies how the City could build an Integrated Recycling Facility (IRF) to
facilitate recycling and waste diversion for residents. The complete report is available on the City’s
website but for the purposes of this work session, staff will present its recommendations for an IRF.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Does the Council have any questions or comments?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Ongoing investigations have been made by the City over the past three decades into recycling and
waste diversion. Fort Collins’ actions have included adoption of a model pay-as-you-throw
ordinance (1995), development of a comprehensive recycling drop-off recycling center (2002),
public education and outreach programs, as well as practices to increasingly reduce waste from
municipal operations.
In 2010, the community had reached a level of 43% waste diversion, falling short of a goal of 50%
that was set in 1999. The City Council requested more work be done on waste diversion. In the
2011 budget process, $55,000 was allocated to conduct a systems approach to managing the local
waste stream and to look at opportunities for generating energy from waste using new, ultra-low-
polluting conversion technology. Both elements of this work have been completed in draft reports;
the Council is reviewing Section 1 of the Waste Stream Study (Attachment 1), while the Waste
Conversion Technologies Review will be brought to a work session this summer.
Additionally, $75,000 was earmarked from Keep Fort Collins Great funds for examining
opportunities to build an expanded recycling facility. This project resulted in the Integrated
Recycling Facility Feasibility Analysis; from this report, staff developed a site-specific
recommendation (Attachment 2) to build an Integrated Recycling Facility.
March 27, 2012 Page 2
Findings from Two New Reports
1. Waste Stream Study
The City hired consultants to establish a waste characterization for the portion of Fort Collins’ waste
stream that goes to local landfills for disposal. They combined data from recent physical “waste
sorts” conducted for Boulder (2010) and Larimer County landfill (2007), as well as on-the-ground
observations to calculate percentages for 14 individual materials that make up the 130,000 tons of
trash generated by our community.
This table (below) shows that 29% of Fort Collins’ waste is described as organic, which includes
“green waste” from landscape vegetation and food scraps. Although the consultants’ source data
does not break it out, applying US Environmental Protection Agency’s standard waste
characterization to the local data shows that wood and yard waste would make up 16,959 tons (13%)
and discarded food would make up 20,728 tons (16%) of Fort Collins’ organics.
Another finding is that nearly 24% of what the community sends to landfills for disposal is
generated by construction and demolition (C&D) activities, including drywall, lumber, treated wood,
rock/concrete, and asphalt shingles.
Finally, the paper category that shows up as nearly 17% of the waste stream is not broken out by
specific paper products. In addition to cardboard and various mixed grades of paper that are
eminently recyclable, it includes some packaging, and soiled paper that does not have market value
for recycling.
Fort Collins Waste Composition
Material Residential Commercial C&D Total Tons
Paper 20.39% 26.67% 0.38% 16.66% 21,658
Plastics 12.31% 12.29% 0.45% 9.13% 11,869
Metal 3.54% 5.24% 2.17% 3.61% 4,693
Glass 2.34% 2.79% 1.18% 2.14% 2,782
Organics 40.12% 33.40% 5.08% 28.99% 37,687
Rock/Concrete/Brick 0.85% 1.26% 31.22% 9.10% 11,830
Asphalt Shingles 0.49% 0.72% 18.02% 5.25% 6,825
Wood
(Painted/Stained/Treated)
0.30% 0.44% 11.06% 3.22% 4,186
Untreated Dimensional
Lumber
0.15% 0.21% 5.31% 1.55% 2,015
Clean/New Drywall 0.14% 0.20% 5.06% 1.47% 1,911
Demo/Painted Drywall 0.28% 0.42% 10.34% 3.01% 3,913
Problem Waste (appliances,
other metals)
18.84% 15.94% 4.73% 14.31% 18,603
Other 0.19% 0.28% 4.98% 1.50% 1,950
Household Hazardous Waste 0.06% 0.13% 0.00% 0.06% 78
TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.00% 100.00% 130,000
March 27, 2012 Page 3
2. Integrated Recycling Facility (IRF) Report
Programs for recycling conventional types of commodities - paper, bottles/cans, and cardboard - are
well established. However, in a community as highly motivated and engaged in recycling as Fort
Collins, residents want to go farther with waste diversion efforts. Environmental Services receives
calls daily from citizens about recycling more “hard-to-recycle” materials than just curbside
recyclables. In the 2011 Air Quality and Recycling Survey, respondents provided many suggestions
for the City about providing a broader range of recycling opportunities (Attachment 3).
Consultants who were hired to conduct the feasibility analysis for an Integrated Recycling Facility
(IRF) observed that with perseverance, Fort Collins residents who source-separate their materials
can go to a number of local “take back” centers; for instance, to recycle metal at scrap metal dealers,
or for-fee sites such as commercial composters that charge gate fees comparable to landfills. The
following list of items fall into this hard-to-recycle category:
• Ferrous Scrap Metal (iron/steel)
• Non-Ferrous Scrap Metal (e.g., window/door frames, brass fixtures, wiring, etc.)
• Concrete/Rock, Brick, Asphalt
• Porcelain/Ceramic (toilets and insulators)
• Wood (dimensional lumber, plywood; excludes treated wood)
• Green Waste (yard debris, tree trimmings)
• Electronic Waste
Their analysis concluded that the primary benefits of developing an IRF operation would be to
provide a convenient lower-cost option for the “self-haulers” that currently use the landfill to dispose
of mixed loads of low-value discards, create the convenience of a “one-stop-shop” for recycling a
variety of diverse materials, and recover more materials of value for recycling that currently go to
landfills for disposal.
Integrated Recycling Facility (IRF) Recommendation
After reviewing financial modeling and waste diversion models for several different approaches that
were developed by the consultants, staff concluded that the construction, operation and management
of a new facility located on City property and owned by the City would have the greatest potential
for meeting the City’s goal of diverting more waste from landfill disposal.
To provide a convenient, one-stop recycling center that accepts mixed loads, staff recommends
building an Integrated Recycling Facility in three phases with the potential for diverting 7,719-
19,500 tons (over time) of low-value discards. The consultants reported that:
• Phase 1 will cost $747,000 to build
N diverts 7,719 tons
N $324,060/year for operations
• no capital costs would be required to move to Phase 2
N diverts 15,438 tons
N $441,064/year for operations
March 27, 2012 Page 4
• expanding to Phase 3 will incur an additional capital cost of $705,000
N diverts 19,500 tons
N $823,742/year for operations
Staff agrees with the consultants’ opinion that it is unlikely a private entity will undertake to build
an IRF because the value of the materials is either low or negative and wouldn’t justify private
investment.
Landfill fees in Colorado are very low; if a fee is charged at a City IRF, the cost will need to be
lower than local landfills’ fees to create an economic incentive for residents to deliver material for
recycling. Staff suggests charging a user fee of $3.75 per cubic yard (32% lower than the Larimer
County Landfill) to use the site; this fee will allow the City to cover the costs of building and
operating an IRF.
Land owned by the City’s Light & Power Utility, located on Timberline Road south of East Prospect
Road, was identified as the best site for a new recycling center that would be open to the public and
private contractors. A complete description and site analysis of this property is included in the IRF
Staff Report (Attachment 2).
The project would be built in phases, starting with a capacity of 250 tons/day for recycling an
extensive list of hard-to-recycle materials. Staff also recommends relocating the equipment and
operation of the City’s Rivendell Recycling Center to the new site. Consolidating the two facilities
would save the City nearly $16,000 in annual rent for the Recycling Center. (The IRF will be
designed to enable citizens to continue recycling conventional “curbside” materials at no cost with
access seven days per week.)
Starting with Phase 1, an Integrated Recycling Facility could help accomplish the City’s 50% waste
diversion goal as well as Climate Action Plan objectives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
It would close gaps in Northern Colorado’s infrastructure for recycling a number of hard-to-recycle
materials, allow more recyclable commodities to be collected in the future, and respond to citizens’
desire to divert more of the waste stream from landfills. A gate fee of $3.75 recommended by staff
is projected to cover the operations and maintenance costs of running an IRF.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Waste Stream Study, Draft, January 2012
2. Integrated Recycling Facility; Staff Recommendation Report
3. Excerpts from Fort Collins 2011 Air Quality/Recycling Survey: Recycling questions, report
of results
4. Powerpoint presentation
Attachment 1
Waste Stream Study
WORKING DRAFT SECTION 1
Consulting Services Provided By:
SloanVAZQUEZLLC
Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Advisors
18006 Skypark Circle, Suite 205
Irvine, CA 92614
Office: 866.241.4533
Fax: 714.276.0625
info@sloanvazquez.com
15230 Burbank Blvd, Suite 103
Sherman Oaks, CA 91411
Office: 818.267.511
cclements@clementsenvironmental.com
March 2012
SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 1
1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
2.0 Waste Stream Study.................................................................................................. 2
2.1 Waste Composition Study Approach ................................................................................. 2
2.2 Waste Stream Study Results.............................................................................................. 3
Chart 1 – Fort Collins 2012 Waste Composition........................................................................................... 4
Chart 2 – Fort Collins Waste Tonnage by Material Category........................................................................ 5
SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City is striving for sustainable, system‐wide solutions to waste disposal, carbon reduction and
renewable energy. To pursue these goals, the City asked the consulting team of Sloan Vazquez, LLC and
Clements Environmental to analyze the City’s wastestream.
WASTE STREAM ANALYSIS
The 2012 Waste Composition was primarly derived from the integration of hetergeneous data sources;
the Larimer1 and Boulder County2 Studies. In addition, tonnage data collected by the City and anecdotal
information gathered from local waste haulers and recyclers informed the analysis.
The 2012 Waste Composition identified three (3) primary waste streams; residential, commercial, and
construction and demolition. Fourteen (14) material categories were selected in order to best identify
opportunities for recovery and diversion from landfill disposal.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Fort Collins engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez, LLC and Clements Environmental to
conduct a Waste Stream Study (Section 1) and a Waste Conversion Technologies Review (Section 2). The
purpose of the Waste Stream Study was to determine how much more of the City’s waste that is now
going to a landfill can be diverted toward materials markets or to potential energy conversion systems.
The purpose of the Waste Conversion Technologies Review was to identify at least two of the most
feasible types of systems or technologies in which the City may wish to invest for future waste stream
management.
Accordingly, this Report provides the following:
Identification of specific discards from the residential, commercial, and Construction and
Demolition (C&D) sectors that are still available for recovery and quantification of their
commodity value and/or energy generation capability
An economic analysis of how to optimize the recovery of the landfill‐disposed materials and
professional recommendations for “highest and best” use in current or future recovery systems
Quantification of the total amount of discarded or under‐utilized materials that is locally
available, which may provide “feedstock” for a waste‐to‐energy processing facility
Examination of options for various technologies designed to capture more value from discards
1 http://www.larimer.org/solidwaste/publications/WasteSort.pdf
2 http://www.bouldercounty.org/find/library/gogreen/boulder.final.wcs2010.pdf
SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 2
2.0 WASTE STREAM STUDY
In order to plan for the City’s future municipal3 solid waste (MSW) management needs, it is important
that the City understand both the volume and the composition of MSW that is currently being disposed
in landfills.
For solid waste planning to be effective, consideration must be given to the many factors that can, and
do, cause wide fluctuations in the volume and composition of MSW. During the past five years, the
economic recession and the collapse of the housing and construction industries has rendered a decrease
in the volume of MSW and caused extraordinary demand and price fluctuations in the recycling markets.
Concurrent with the economic decline, the U.S. has seen a rising “green” ethos that has spurred the
success of municipal recycling programs, changed manufacturing practices, and reduced consumption.
This combination of events has made the forecasting of MSW volume and composition a tricky, albeit
achievable, task.
2.1 WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY APPROACH
The Project Team developed a new, data‐based waste composition (2012 Waste Composition) of the
waste generated from the City that is currently landfilled. The 2012 Waste Composition is based
primarily upon waste composition studies prepared for the Boulder County Resource Conservation
Division and for Larimer County. In addition, the Project Team referred to tonnage data collected by the
City, anecdotal information gathered from Larimer County Public Works/Solid Waste (including the
observation of loads disposed at the Larimer County Landfill), local waste collection companies, and
recyclers.
Our analysis and interpretation of the methods and results of the Boulder and Larimer County studies
confirmed their validity as reasonable and reliable sources for the development of a new data‐based
waste composition for the City. In the Boulder and Larimer County studies, the Project Team determined
that the sampling plans, sampling procedures, field data collection, and statistical analysis were
developed and implemented to assure that the waste composition results were statistically
representative of the total disposed waste stream and statistically valid.
The 2012 Waste Composition is primarily derived from the integration of the two heterogeneous data
sources. The Larimer County study was completed pre‐recession (in 2007) and is primarily based upon
2006 data. The Boulder County study was completed in 2010 and captures the effects of waste
generation and composition wrought by changing economic and environmental conditions. Because the
communities share many similar geographic, demographic, and economic characteristics, the
methodical combination of results from the two studies projects a reasonable waste composition for
City’s planning purposes.
3 “Municipal” refers to the community’s entire stream of discards, with the exception of industrial material and
construction/demolition debris (http://www.epa.gov/wastes/inforesources/pubs/orientat/rom2.pdf ).
SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 3
2.2 WASTE STREAM STUDY RESULTS
The 2012 Waste Composition for the City is presented in Table 1 as well as in Chart 1. The waste is
categorized into 14 material types. A percentage of total waste is provided by material type by for each
waste stream (i.e., residential, commercial, and C&D), as well as for the total waste.
Table 1 – Fort Collins 2012 Waste Composition
Material Residential Commercial C&D Total Tons
Paper 20.39% 26.67% 0.38% 16.66% 21,658
Plastics 12.31% 12.29% 0.45% 9.13% 11,869
Metal 3.54% 5.24% 2.17% 3.61% 4,693
Glass 2.34% 2.79% 1.18% 2.14% 2,782
Organics 40.12% 33.40% 5.08% 28.99% 37,687
Rock/Concrete/Brick 0.85% 1.26% 31.22% 9.10% 11,830
Asphalt Shingles 0.49% 0.72% 18.02% 5.25% 6,825
Wood (Painted/Stained/Treated) 0.30% 0.44% 11.06% 3.22% 4,186
Untreated Dimensional Lumber 0.15% 0.21% 5.31% 1.55% 2,015
Clean/New Drywall 0.14% 0.20% 5.06% 1.47% 1,911
Demo/Painted Drywall 0.28% 0.42% 10.34% 3.01% 3,913
Problem Waste (appliances, etc.) 18.84% 15.94% 4.73% 14.31% 18,603
Other 0.19% 0.28% 4.98% 1.50% 1,950
Household Hazardous Waste 0.06% 0.13% 0.00% 0.06% 78
TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.00% 100.00% 130,000
According to data collected by the City, approximately 130,000 tons of municipal solid waste generated
in the City were landfill disposed. Applying the 2010 Waste Composition to the City’s landfilled tonnage
produces the weights, in tons, of the specified material types as represented in Table 1, Column entitled
Tons.
For the City’s planning purposes, the Project Team chose to base recovery and recycling projections
upon the treatment/processing of the commingled waste stream. That is, the direct processing and
separation of mixed commercial, residential and industrial materials.
SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 4
Chart 1 – Fort Collins 2012 Waste Composition
Household Hazards, 0.06%
Paper, 16.66%
Plastics, 9.13%
Metal, 3.61%
Rock/Concrete/Brick, 9.10%
Asphalt Shingles, 5.25%
Painted/Stained/Treated
Wood, 3.22%
Untreated Dimensional
Lumber, 1.55%
Clean/New Drywall, 1.47%
Demo/Painted Drywall,
3.01%
Other, 1.50%
Glass, 2.14%
Organics, 28.99%
Problem Waste, 14.31%
SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 5
Chart 2 – Fort Collins Waste Tonnage by Material Category
Household Hazards, 78
Paper, 21,658
Plastics, 11,869
Metal, 4,693
Rock/Concrete/Brick,
11,830
Asphalt Shingles, 6,825
Painted/Stained/Treated
Wood, 4,186
Untreated Dimensional
Lumber, 2,015
Clean/New Drywall, 1,911
Demo/Painted Drywall,
3,913
Other, 1,950
Glass, 2,782
Organics, 37,687
Problem Waste, 18,603
Attachment 2
March 2012
Integrated Recycling Facility
Staff Report
Consulting Work Provided by:
SloanVAZQUEZLLC
Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Advisors
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 1
Staff Recommendation............................................................................................................ 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 2
2.0 RECOMMENDATION FOR BUILDING NEW RECYCLING FACILITY .............................. 3
3.0 PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED RECYCLING FACILITY ......................... 4
3.1 Phase 1 – Small Volume Operations (250 Cubic Yards Per Day) ............................................... 6
3.2 Phase 2 – Medium Volume Operations (250‐500 Cubic Yards Per Day)................................... 7
3.3 Phase 3 – Large Volume Operations (500‐750 Cubic Yards Per Day)........................................ 7
4.0 ORGANIC MATERIALS AND C&D DEBRIS ................................................................. 9
5.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................... 9
6.0 SITE DETAILS FOR TIMBERLINE PROPERTY .............................................................10
7.0 FINANCIAL MODELS...............................................................................................13
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fort Collins adopted a goal in 1999 to divert 50% of the community’s waste stream from landfill disposal by
2010. In 2010, the rate of waste diversion had reached 43%. The City Council requested information on
building an Integrated Recycling Facility (IRF), which would facilitate recycling and waste diversion for
residents. A consulting team prepared a complete Feasibility Report, available on the City’s website at
http://www.fcgov.com/recycling/pdf/integrated‐recycling‐facility‐feasibility‐analysis.pdf?1329241951.
During the preparation of the Feasibility report, the consultants were pleased to find that the local area is
reasonably well served by various public, private and non‐profit organizations that offer opportunities to
recycle and reuse concrete, rock, brick, tile, organic materials, ferrous and non‐ferrous metals, furniture and
fixtures, in additional to traditional recyclables (newspaper, bottles, and cans, cardboard).
The consultants noted that highly motivated residents and businesses already have multiple options for
recycling, but that many residents and contractors with mixed loads currently go to the landfill rather than
drive to multiple sites for recycling. Their analysis concluded that the primary benefits of developing an IRF
operation would be to provide a convenient lower‐cost option for the self‐haulers that currently use the
landfill, create the convenience of a “one stop shop” for recycling a variety of diverse materials, and recover
more materials of value that would otherwise go to landfills for disposal. (The consultants do not address
economic savings that would accrue to the community from extending the lifespan of local landfills.)
The consultants suggested that in their experience, an IRF could serve as catalyst for a new wave of recyclers
and recycling in the community. However, they considered that the success of such a facility will require
sustained operational and financial support from the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Using the consultants’ report, staff developed recommendations for how to develop an IRF that are contained
in this document. It is staff’s conclusion that the construction, operation and management of a new, stand‐
alone facility located on City property and owned by the City would have the greatest potential for meeting the
City’s goal of diverting more waste from landfill disposal. Loads of material collected at an IRF would be then
delivered to local businesses for further processing and marketing.
It is unlikely that a private entity will undertake building an IRF because the value of the materials that would
be collected at such a facility is either low or negative. Landfill fees in Colorado are very low. If a fee is charged
at the IRF, the City will need to keep it lower than local landfills’ fees to create an economic incentive for
residents to deliver material to the IRF. Staff suggests charging a user fee of $3.75 per cubic yard (32% lower
than the landfill) to use the site, which the consultants calculate will allow the City to recover the costs of
building and operating an IRF.
To provide a convenient, one‐stop recycling center that accepts mixed loads, staff recommends building an
Integrated Recycling Facility in three phases with the potential for diverting 7,719‐19,500 tons (over time) of
low‐value discards. The consultants reported that Phase 1 will cost $500,000 to build, excluding the price of
land, and that expanding it to Phase 3 will cost an additional $705,000.
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 2
Land owned by the City’s Light & Power Utility, located on Timberline Road south of East Prospect Road, was
identified in the consultants’ real estate survey as the best site for a new recycling center that would be open
to the public and to private contractors. At a conceptual review meeting with City transportation planners,
staff learned that with appropriate pull‐out lanes, this site can be safely used by the amount of vehicular traffic
that would be generated (the City’s current drop‐off site is visited by 400 recyclers daily). Staff has not
discussed a selling price for this 7‐acre property with the Light & Power Utility. However, because the
Timberline Road property is already owned by the City and is ideally located, it presents the fewest obstacles
for successfully developing an IRF of any of the 23 sites that were evaluated by the consultants.
The project would be built in phases, starting with a capacity of 250 tons/day for recycling an extensive list of
hard‐to‐recycle materials. Staff also recommends relocating the equipment and operation of the City’s
Rivendell Recycling Center to the new site. By consolidating the two facilities, conventional “curbside”
materials would also be accepted at the IRF, including corrugated cardboard (OCC) and paperboard, mixed
types of paper, “commingled” bottles, cans, and containers, and used clothing (textiles). This move would save
the City nearly $16,000 in annual rent for the Recycling Center (the IRF will be designed to enable citizens to
continue recycling conventional “curbside” materials at no cost).
Under a phased construction plan, an IRF could recover 7,719 new tons of material initially. In the Phase 2
expansion, 15,438 tons would be diverted without incurring new capital costs, and in Phase 3, 19,500 tons are
anticipated to be diverted. Therefore, the Integrated Recycling Facility is designed to address the City’s stated
objectives immediately upon implementation of Phase 1, including the 50% waste diversion goal, as well as
Climate Action Plan goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The consultants considered a household hazardous waste (HHW) collection component for the IRF to be
infeasible for the City because of the extraordinary costs of permitting, receiving, handling, manifesting,
transporting, processing, recycling and disposing of the material. However, staff will continue to research the
potential for certain types of HHW, such as batteries, motor oil, or latex paint, that could possibly be accepted
at a fully‐staffed IRF.
The financial models for an IRF demonstrate that the cost per cubic yard will be lower than the cost of landfill
disposal. It is important to note that the bottom‐line costs in each model are driven by a projected volume of
incoming material and a projected value of the recovered commodities. The consultants used conservative
projections for the volume and value in the financial models for each assumption; the actual revenues and
waste diversion volumes may be higher than shown in their report.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City’s goal to divert 50% of the waste stream from landfill disposal by 2010 was not met. The City Council
directed staff to conduct work on Fort Collins’ waste system and to examine what options are available to
increase recycling. The City currently operates a community recycling center at 1702 Riverside that accepts a
variety of recyclable materials. However, achieving additional diversion for “hard‐to‐recycle” materials is
constrained by the limited availability of local and regional infrastructure.
The City of Fort Collins engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez, LLC and Clements Environmental to develop a
feasibility analysis for an Integrated Recycling Facility (IRF) that will accept a variety of discarded materials and
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 3
recyclable commodities. The consultants researched the extent to which the local area is already served by
various public, private and non‐profit organizations that offer opportunities to recycle and reuse concrete,
rock, brick, tile, organic materials, ferrous and non‐ferrous metals, furniture and fixtures, in additional to the
traditional newspaper, bottles, and cans. They learned that residents and businesses do have options for
recycling if they are motivated to find the locations and willing to visit multiple sites (see the list of “who
recycles what” at http://www.fcgov.com/recycling/centers.php ).
The primary benefits of developing an IRF operation would be to provide a convenient lower‐cost option for
the self‐haulers that currently use the landfill, and to create a convenient “one stop shop” for recycling a
variety of diverse materials. While an IRF could serve as catalyst for a new wave of recyclers and recycling in
the community, it is likely that the success of such a facility will require sustained operational and financial
support from the City.
The consulting team also completed a thorough feasibility analysis to assist the City in determining the viability
for developing an IRF to increase waste diversion. The complete report included: evaluating 23 potential sites
for an IRF using a decision‐making matrix; laying out a conceptual design for a new facility; identifying target
recyclables; calculating capital and operating costs; market considerations; and ownership models. The
Integrated Recycling Facility Feasibility Analysis (real estate information redacted) is available at
http://www.fcgov.com/recycling/reports.php .
City staff used much of the content of the IRF Feasibility Analysis to produce this shorter Staff Report for
providing a summary recommendation for the City Council for constructing an IRF.
2.0 RECOMMENDATION FOR BUILDING NEW RECYCLING FACILITY
After reviewing financial modeling and waste diversion modeling for different approaches that were developed
by the consultants, staff concluded that the construction, operation and management of a new, stand‐alone
facility located on City property and owned by the City would have the greatest potential for meeting the City’s
goal of diverting more waste from landfill disposal.
Land owned by the City’s Light & Power Utility, located on Timberline Road south of East Prospect Road, was
identified as the best site for a new recycling center that would be open to the public and private contractors.
Staff held a conceptual review meeting with City transportation planners to assure that this site can be safely
accessed by the amount of vehicular traffic that would be generated by an IRF (the City’s current drop‐off site
is visited by 400 recyclers daily). Staff has not discussed a selling price for this 7‐acre property with the Light &
Power Utility.
The project would be built in phases, starting with a capacity of 250 tons/day for recycling the following
materials:
Ferrous Scrap (iron/steel, rebar, cookware, car & truck wheels, canisters, drums, etc.)
Non‐Ferrous Scrap (window/door frames, siding, copper/brass fixtures, wiring, etc.)
Concrete/Rock, Brick/Tile, Asphalt (paving & shingles)
Porcelain/Ceramic (toilets & insulators)
Wood (dimensional lumber, plywood; excludes painted or preserved wood)
Green Waste (yard debris, tree trimmings)
Electronic Waste (monitors, televisions, computers, CRTs, etc.)
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 4
Heavy‐Duty Plastics (buckets, lawn furniture, large children’s toys such as “Big Wheels”)
Staff also recommends relocating the equipment and operation of the City’s Rivendell Recycling Center to the
new site. By consolidating the two facilities, conventional “curbside” materials would also be accepted at the
IRF, including corrugated cardboard and paperboard, mixed types of paper, “commingled” bottles, cans, and
containers, and used clothing (textiles).
Staff’s recommendation includes that a fee be charged to use the facility for newly collected types of materials
(not including conventional curbside recycling materials that are currently collected at the Rivendell Recycling
Center). A proposed fee of approximately $3.75 per cubic yard will allow the City to cover the costs of
operating a new IRF, according to financial calculations made by the consultants.
3.0 PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED RECYCLING FACILITY
Staff’s recommendation is to develop a full‐service, stand‐alone IRF that can be implemented in three phases.
Basic parameters for the IRF include:
Conventional recycling (“curbside”) materials collected at a front area that is non‐staffed and open
seven days per week at no charge.
Separate gated area that is staffed by workers for accepting new types of material
o 40 hour per week operation (days and operating hours to be determined)
o Assumes that operations of the IRF will be contracted to a private company
o Targets “Self‐Haulers” and lower value recyclables
o Fee of $3.75 per cubic yard
Collected materials are consolidated into large (40‐yard), open‐topped metal boxes and transported to
processing facilities. For some materials, such as metals, the City could expect to be paid. Green
waste and lumber, however, would incur the cost of gate fees to be taken to a local commercial
composter.
An Integrated Recycling Facility is intended to largely serve citizens who currently “self‐haul” loads to
local landfills that contain a mix of low‐value discards. Though most of these materials have a low or
negative monetary value, they present excellent opportunities for increasing the amount of material
that is recovered for recycling, thereby reducing landfill disposal.
PHASE 1 – Small Volume Start‐Up Operation (Up to 250 Cubic Yards per Day)
‐ $500,000 municipal capital investment for land and improvements (general market values researched
by the consultants)
‐ $237,000 municipal capital investment for IRF equipment
‐ Projected total annual diversion from landfill: 7,719 tons
‐ Creation of 3 new jobs
PHASE 2 – Medium Volume Operation (250‐500 Cubic Yards per Day)
‐ No added municipal capital investment for land and improvements or additional IRF equipment
‐ Projected total annual diversion from landfill: 15,438 tons
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 5
‐ Creation of 3 more new jobs (total 6 new jobs)
PHASE 3 – Large Volume Operation (500‐750 Cubic Yards per Day)
‐ No added municipal capital investment for land and improvements
‐ $442,500 municipal capital investment for IRF equipment
‐ Projected total annual diversion from landfill: 19,500 tons
‐ Creation of 4 more new jobs (total 10 new jobs)
‐ Lower recovery rates than Phase 1 & 2 due to mechanized sorting and larger incoming volumes
Integrated Recycling Facility Recovery Rate Summary
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Annual Tonnage 8,125 16,250 24,375
New Diversion 95.0% 7,719 95.0% 15,437.5 80.0% 19,500
Landfill Disposal 5.0% 406 5.0% 812.5 20.0% 4,875
Integrated Recycling Facility Impacts on Diversion Rate for Fort Collins
2010 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Annual New Tons from IRF 0 7,719 15,438 19,500
Community Diversion Rate 43.26% 45.36% 47.61% 48.66%
Change in Diversion Rate 0% 2.10% 4.35% 5.40%
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 6
3.1 PHASE 1 – SMALL VOLUME OPERATIONS (250 CUBIC YARDS PER DAY)
Self‐haulers (residents and commercial customers) enter the facility and are directed to the area for unloading
their recyclable materials into designated salvage bins (see general site plan below – salvage bins are
designated with a number 7). When full, the material‐specific salvage bins are emptied into the larger roll‐off
boxes (designated with numbers 1 through 6) by an equipment operator. The full roll‐off boxes are delivered
to local buyers/end‐users.
Integrated Recycling Facility Layout
STAFF REQUIREMENTS
Phase 1 operations require three full‐time personnel, including a Site Manager and two equipment operators
(forklift, roll‐off truck).
MATERIAL RECOVERY & DIVERSION
Based on the materials targeted and the operational configuration of Phase 1, it is projected that 8,125 tons of
material will be received, of which 95% (7,719 tons) will be recovered. With a 5% “residues” rate for
unrecyclable trash, 406 tons of waste would be sent annually to the Larimer County landfill.
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES REQUIREMENT
Implementation of a 250‐ton/day IRF requires approximately $737,000 in capital expenditures:
$500,000 – Land and Improvements
$57,000 – Roll‐Off Boxes and Salvage Bins
$140,000 – Forklift and Roll‐Off Truck
$40,000 – Cardboard (OCC) Compactor
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 7
3.2 PHASE 2 – MEDIUM VOLUME OPERATIONS (250500 CUBIC YARDS PER DAY)
This expansion from the initial IRF design does not change the basic design and traffic pattern.
STAFF REQUIREMENTS
With the growth of an IRF to 500 tons/day capacity, additional IRF staff is now needed to assist customers to
unload and deposit their materials into the designated salvage bins, in order to expedite traffic flow. It
requires three additional full‐time sorters/unloaders to be hired in addition to a Site Manager and two
equipment operators.
MATERIAL RECOVERY & DIVERSION
Phase 2 consists of increasing the quantity of material that can be received at the facility to 500 cubic yards per
day or 130,000 cubic yards per year. Based on a 250 lbs/cubic yard factor, the facility will be capable of
receiving up to 16,250 tons per year. At this level of operations, with an annual through‐put of 16,250 tons,
95% (15,438 tons) would be recovered and 812 tons would be sent to the landfill.
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES REQUIREMENT
This expansion does not require additional capital expenditures (see Phase 1).
3.3 PHASE 3 – LARGE VOLUME OPERATIONS (500750 CUBIC YARDS PER DAY)
Phase 3 expands the capacity of the facility to receive up to 750 cubic yards per day or 195,000 cubic yards per
year by targeting the same self‐haul customers and materials but also accepting loads that may require
additional sorting at the site. Based on a 250 lbs/cubic yard weight factor, the facility will be capable of
receiving up to 24,375 tons per year.
In Phase 3, site operations continue as in Phase 2. To accommodate the larger volumes, a “wheel‐loader”
spreads materials on the tipping floor to facilitate identification and recovery of targeted materials by the
sorters. This process requires a below‐ground ramp be constructed, for loading the residue into roll‐off boxes
(boxes labeled “10” in following site plan).
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 8
Phase 3 Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REQUIREMENTS
Implementation of Phase 3 requires four additional full‐time personnel to manage the additional
tonnage/material. The personnel required for Phase 3 includes a Site Manager, four equipment operators, and
five floor‐sorters.
EQUIPMENT AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES REQUIREMENT
Phase 3 operations require the acquisition of the additional equipment and additional capital investment of
approximately $705,500 as follows:
$500,000 – Building & Site Improvements
$180,000 – Wheel‐loader and Roll‐Off Pup‐Trailer
$25,500 – Additional Roll‐Off Boxes
MATERIAL RECOVERY & DIVERSION
Of the total 24,375 tons of material that would be projected annually in a Phase 3 Integrated Recycling Facility,
80% (19,500 tons) would be recovered and 20% (4,875 tons) would be sent to Larimer County Landfill for
disposal. The increase in waste residues ‐ from 5% in previous phases to 20% in Phase 3 ‐ results from a major
change in operations, whereby significantly more material now enters the facility. In Phase 3, customers are
now allowed to empty large mixed loads onto a tipping floor to be mechanically separated; mixed loads by
definition will include more trash “residues” than source‐separated loads accepted in Phases 1 and 2.
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 9
4.0 ORGANIC MATERIALS AND C&D DEBRIS
The IRF would be designed to be a full‐service drop‐off facility for self‐haulers to bring green waste and
construction and demolition (C&D) materials, with a capacity to receive up to 377,000 cubic yards of the
various materials annually. Based on a 250 lbs/cubic yard factor for the self‐hauler waste, a weight of 300
lbs/cubic yard for the yard waste and a weight of 400 lbs/cubic yard for the C&D debris, the facility will be
capable of receiving up to 47,125 tons per year.
Details for how to comprehensively sort out construction debris and process woody material at the IRF were
fully described as Phase 4 in the consultants’ report. These operations would require specialized equipment
including: an industrial‐scale tub grinder; a tube‐shaped screening device called a trommel screen; and, a C&D
sort‐line. It would also require 11 additional staff to be hired for sorting and operating equipment.
While staff does recommend collecting organics such as green waste (yard debris and tree trimmings) and
separated C&D at the IRF, staff doesn’t consider the extra costs for adding processing capability to be
warranted at this time. In the future, the City may decide that is in the best interests of the citizens of Fort
Collins to take a greater role in processing organic materials and lumber. At that point, the Timberline IRF
could likely be reconfigured to accommodate the sorting and grinding processes that are required to obtain
the correct size of wood chips utilized in, for instance, commercial‐scale composting or energy recovery
projects.
5.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
TOTAL ACREAGE & BUILDINGS
Phases 1 & 2 require an area of not less than 30,000 square feet. Phase 3 requires another 20,000 square feet
at minimum. The simplest and least expensive option is an open‐air facility with a small office equipped with a
cash register, a safe, a computer, and billing software. The City may choose to install a scale in the future and
track the IRF material by weight instead of by volume. An enhanced version can include a building of
approximately 10,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet to enclose the vehicle unloading area, providing
shelter from the elements and reducing potential impacts of noise, dust, odor, and litter. Storage can be
provided by bunkers, roll‐off containers, and bins. It is not necessary to cover these storage areas or
containers, although some protection from wind will need to be designed.
UTILITIES AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS
The site will require electricity for site lighting, fencing and gates, signage, and paved surfaces. If an office is
included, then water, sewer, and gas connections would be needed.
Construction and operation of a recycling drop‐off facility does not require a formal solid waste permit. The
Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment’s Solid Waste Division states that under new
regulations, materials collected must be contained in a proper manner so as not to cause a nuisance.
Expansion of the IRF to include material sorting/processing (Phase 2) requires the facility to register with the
Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment and report tonnages.
Stormwater will be controlled at the site using Best Management Practices prescribed for new development
and construction. An application for Stormwater Discharges must be submitted in order to obtain a Recycling
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 10
Industrial General Permit for stormwater. As part of the stormwater permitting process, a Stormwater
Management Plan must be prepared and certified.
Lastly, the type of air permit required depends on the levels of criteria pollutants anticipated for the project.
For the IRF, particulates are the primary source of emissions. If the facility produces greater than two tons of
particulates annually, an Air Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN) must be filed. A Construction Permit is required
for emission of more than five tons of particulates annually.
TRANSPORT OF MATERIALS
The recommended configuration is to load materials into roll‐off containers. They can then be picked up by
roll‐off trucks and transported to processing plants. E‐waste and other special materials can be loaded in
specially constructed boxes or shrink‐wrapped on pallets, then loaded by forklift onto flatbed trucks and
hauled to appropriate processing facilities.
VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ACCESS PLAN
The Light & Power property on Timberline would require modifications to the road and driveways to
accommodate public vehicles and truck traffic. A traffic circulation plan will be developed so that vehicles
delivering material, and trucks that transport full roll‐off boxes to processors, follow a clockwise pattern that
safely enters and leaves the facility. Transportation planning will be coordinated with the City’s Development
Review Center to determine what additional turn‐out lanes will be required so that vehicles do not queue on
Timberline Road.
PUBLIC VS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OPTIONS
If the IRF facility is to be provided as a public service, free to residents of Fort Collins, then it makes the most
sense for the City to own the real estate. The operation of the facility and the provision of the equipment
could be done by the City, or contracted out to a private company. In this scenario, the City would subsidize
the entire cost of the operation.
If, however, the operation is to be self‐supporting and charge a fee for the service, it is possible that the
private sector could own and operate the IRF. It is unlikely that a venture of this sort would be profitable. The
value of the material to be collected at the IRF is either low or negative. Landfill fees in Colorado are very low.
If a fee is charged at the IRF that is higher than local landfills’ fees (approximately $20 per ton), it creates an
economic disincentive for residents to deliver material to the IRF. It is unlikely, therefore, that a private entity
will undertake this project.
6.0 SITE DETAILS FOR TIMBERLINE PROPERTY
The Light & Power property on Timberline Road lies south of Prospect Road on the west side of the street and
occupies 7.0 acres. The City of Fort Collins currently owns the site and uses a portion of it for Forestry
operations and storage for the Parks Department. There are no buildings on this site. The 3.5 acres closest to
the road slope northward, and the back portion of the site is relatively flat. There is fencing surrounding the
existing operations and the site is not paved. A Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) Substation is located to
the north on additional City property. A railroad track is located to the west and beyond that is the Edora Pool
Ice Center. The Jessup Farm is located across Timberline Road to the east, and on the south side of the site is
an automotive service shop.
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 11
Location Map: Timberline, South of Prospect
Aerial Photo of Timberline, South of Prospect
This parcel is zoned I (Industrial) and is owned by the City of Fort Collins. A special review would be required in
order to operate the Integrated Recycling Facility. Adjacent zoning is Medium Density Mixed‐Use
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 12
Neighborhood (MMN) and Industrial (I). Based on the existing adjacent businesses and zoning, a recycling
facility would be an appropriate land use.
Site access is currently provided by one existing driveway off Timberline Road. The existing driveway is not
paved and would need to be improved to provide sufficient access to the IRF. Timberline Road is four lanes,
but there is no dedicated turn lane for access into the site from either direction. The main arterial leading to
Timberline Road from I‐25 is Prospect Road, which is four‐lane divided highway most of the way to I‐25. The
site is 3.4 miles from the center of Fort Collins and 2.2 miles from I‐25 via Prospect Road.
The site is already owned by the City of Fort Collins. Some City operations may need to be combined or
relocated to accommodate the IRF, but there appears to be ample acreage for this. Additionally, the City may
want to discuss any new operations at the site with PRPA. Fort Collins and PRPA have an existing agreement
which allows PRPA to use city property adjacent to the site for their substation.
The primary benefits of this location are:
City‐owned (compared to very high prices of several other available properties)
Large size (7.0 acres) for future expansion and to accommodate existing Forestry operations
I zoning
Compatible industrial adjacent land uses
Centrally located
Not visible from any residential areas
Could relocate the nearby recycling center to the IRF without excessive impacts on current users
Access off major arterial
The key challenge to development at this site is upgrading Timberline Road with turn pockets for proper traffic
circulation.
Timberline, South of East Prospect Site (facing west)
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 13
7.0 FINANCIAL MODELS
The financial models for a new, free‐standing Integrated Recycling Facility that were developed by the
consulting team assume that materials will be received free of charge and that revenue would only be received
from the sale of recyclable materials. However, staff recommends that since the materials targeted are
currently being disposed of in local landfills at a cost, applying a fee that allows the City to recover its costs is
reasonable and helps reinforce to citizens that recycling isn’t free (a common misperception). The consultants
concluded that, as long as the assumed operating factors are achieved, the costs per cubic yard for the IRF’s
operations would be a lower cost than current landfill fees of $5.50 per cubic yard. The proposed fee of $3.75
per cubic yard is 32% lower than landfill disposal costs.
Revenues for all phases were projected based on recent waste characterizations and local prices that are paid
per ton of commodity (local and regional buyers and brokers of the targeted commodities were contacted in
December 2011). “Revenue/Ton” is net revenue that the City will receive per ton in each commodity category.
Based on this waste characterization and commodity prices, each ton of materials is projected to generate
$10.59 per ton. With this revenue, plus a $3.75 user fee, the City should be able to cover the costs of
installing, operating, and maintaining an IRF.
Waste Characterization & Revenue/Ton
Commodity % of Waste Stream Price/Ton Revenue/Ton
Ferrous Scrap Metal (Steel) 6.5% $160.00 $10.40
Non‐Ferrous Scrap Metal 1.5% $500.00 $7.50
Concrete/Rock 12.5% $0.00 $0.00
Brick/Tile 12.5% $0.00 $0.00
Porcelain/Ceramic 3.0% $0.00 $0.00
Asphalt 6.0% $0.00 $0.00
Wood 25.0% ($31.25) ($7.81)
Green Waste 15.0% ($33.33) ($5.00)
Electronic Waste 5.0% ($50.00) ($2.50)
Cardboard (OCC) 8.0% $100.00 $8.00
Textiles 5.0% $0.00 $0.00
Revenue/Ton $10.59
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 14
Total capital expenditures for Phase 1 and 2 are projected to be $737,000, including $500,000 for land and
$237,000 for the acquisition of rolling stock and waste handling equipment. In all options, land and
improvement costs are amortized over a 30‐year term at 3% interest.
Capital Requirements for a Phased Integrated Recycling Facility
Phase 1 Phase 2
No new capital costs
Phase 3
Additional costs
Price Qty Amount Qty Amount Qty Amount
Land $250,000
Building $250,000 $500,000
Cardboard Compactor $40,000 1 $40,000 1 0
Wheel Loader $150,000 0 0 1 $150,000
Forklift $40,000 1 $40,000 1 0
Roll‐Off Truck $100,000 1 $100,00 1 0
Pup Trailer $30,000 0 0 1 $30,000
3‐Yard Salvage Bins $400 15 $6,000 15 0
50‐Yard Roll‐Off Boxes $5,000 6 $30,000 9 $15,000
12‐Yard Roll‐Off Boxes $3,500 6 $21,000 9 $10,000
TOTAL $747,000 $705,000
For Phase 1, up to 8,125 annual tons, or 65,000 cubic yards are projected. The net cost, after crediting the
projected value of recovered recyclables, is $29.83 per ton, or approximately $3.73 per cubic yard. By charging
a fee of $3.73 per cubic yard, the City can expect to break even under Phase 1.
In Phase 2, additional capital expenditures are not incurred. However, added staffing is required to handle the
extra 16,250 tons per year, or 130,000 cubic yards that are projected. With the added tonnage and no
additional capital requirement, the IRF operating costs drop to $17.08 per ton, or $2.14 per cubic yard. By
charging a fee of $2.14 per cubic yard, the City can expect to break even in Phase 2.
For Phase 3, additional capital expenditures of $705,000 are projected, including $500,000 for improvements
and $205,000 for rolling stock and waste handling equipment. An additional three sorters are included in the
full‐time staff and disposal costs increase due to the anticipated receipt of mixed loads that will likely contain
more hard‐to‐recycle materials. Even with the expected annual tonnage increase to 24,375 for Phase 3, the
added capital, labor and disposal costs render a per ton operating cost of $25.33 per ton, or $3.17 per cubic
yard. By charging a fee of $3.17 per cubic yard, the City can expect to break even under Phase 3.
The consultants’ modeling of costs does not include the implied benefits from not filling up the landfill, which
should still be evaluated as part of the value of an IRF, and which would also help offset its cost.
City of Fort Collins Integrated Recycling Facility
STAFF REPORT 15
Integrated Recycling Facility Proforma
Revenue tons $/ton Annual tons
$/ton Annual tons $/ton Annual
Gate Fees 8,125 $0.00 $0 16,250 $0.00 $0 24,375 $0.00
$0
Commodity Sales $10.06 $81,723 $10.06 $163,441 $8.47
$206,437
Total Revenue $10.06 $81,723 $10.06 $163,441 $8.47
$206,437
Operational Costs
Labor $22.19 $180,331 $17.67 $287,179 $18.97
$462,302
Equip Maint & Ops $7.15 $58,128 $3.58 $58,128 $3.83
$93,420
Disposal 406 $25.00 $10,156 813 $25.00 $20,313 4,875 $25.00
$121,875
Sub-Total Operational Costs $30.60 $248,615 $22.50 $365,620 $27.80
$677,597
G&A Costs $1.65 $13,400 $0.82 $13,400 $0.71
$17,420
Interest & Depreciation
Interest Expense $2.65 $21,568 $1.33 $21,568 $1.73
$42,224
Depreciation $4.98 $40,476 $2.49 $40,476 $3.55
$86,500
Sub-Total Interest & Depreciation $7.64 $62,045 $3.82 $62,045
$5.28 $128,724
Total Costs $39.88 $324,060 $27.14 $441,064 $33.79
$823,742
Surplus/Deficit ($29.83) ($242,337) ($17.08) ($277,624) ($25.33)
($617,305)
Tons 8,125 16,250 24,375
Cu Yds @ 250 lbs 65,000 130,000 195,000
Cost/Cu Yd ($3.73) ($2.14) ($3.17)
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Attachment 3
Air Quality & Recycling Survey
Report of Results
2011
Page 25 - excerpts
Support for recycling in Fort Collins was strong. Most residents in Fort Collins
(about 80%) somewhat or strongly agreed that businesses and residents in both
single and multi-family dwellings should be required to recycle. About 90% of
respondents would like to see yard waste recycling options for single-family
residences. Most do not think that smaller businesses should be exempt from
recycling requirements.
Figure 1: To Help Increase Recycling I Think: (2011)
Attachment 3
Page 54
Question 26
I recycle at the following level: 2011 2007
Number Percent Number Percent
Can’t, it is not available 43 10% 49 9%
Never, but it is available 18 4% 79 14%
Less than once a month 3 1% 0 0%
Once a month 19 4% 90 16%
Twice a month or more 326 75% 345 61%
Don’t know 23 5% 0 0%
Curbside recycling program
Total 432 100% 564 100%
Can’t, it is not available 79 20% 106 19%
Never, but it is available 85 22% 98 18%
Less than once a month 58 15% 0 0%
Once a month 20 5% 150 27%
Twice a month or more 62 16% 196 36%
Don’t know 90 23% 0 0%
Yard trimmings
Total 393 100% 549 100%
Can’t, it is not available 62 15% 106 19%
Never, but it is available 71 18% 81 15%
Less than once a month 142 35% 0 0%
Once a month 7 2% 121 22%
Twice a month or more 9 2% 239 44%
Don’t know 110 27% 0 0%
Electronic waste
Total 400 100% 547 100%
Can’t, it is not available 18 4% NA NA
Never, but it is available 140 35% NA NA
Less than once a month 97 24% NA NA
Once a month 29 7% NA NA
Twice a month or more 17 4% NA NA
Don’t know 103 25% NA NA
Drop-off site at Rivendell
School, NE corner of Riverside
and E. Prospect*
Total 405 100% NA NA
2007 had different response categories they matched to 2011 data as follows: "Always"= "Twice a
month or more, "Sometimes"="Once a month", "Never"="Never", "Can't/Don't know"="Can't, it is not
available
Attachment 3
Page 54
Question 27 (2011 only)
To help increase recycling I think: Number Percent
Strongly agree 256 57%
Somewhat agree 95 21%
Somewhat
disagree
46 10%
Strongly disagree 44 10%
Don’t know 6 1%
All businesses should be required to recycle
Total 447 100%
Strongly agree 54 13%
Somewhat agree 75 17%
Somewhat
disagree
116 27%
Strongly disagree 161 37%
Don’t know 24 6%
Only businesses of 15 or more employees should be required
to recycle
Total 430 100%
Strongly agree 258 58%
Somewhat agree 98 22%
Somewhat
disagree
34 8%
Strongly disagree 46 10%
Don’t know 10 2%
Multi-family apartments should be required to recycle
Total 445 100%
Strongly agree 230 52%
Somewhat agree 111 25%
Somewhat
disagree
41 9%
Strongly disagree 53 12%
Don’t know 10 2%
Single-family residents should be required to recycle
Total 445 100%
Strongly agree 273 62%
Somewhat agree 129 29%
Single-family residents should have options for yard-waste
recycling
Somewhat
disagree
9 2%
Attachment 3
Strongly disagree 19 4%
Don’t know 13 3%
Total 443 100%
Attachment 3
Appendix VI
Page 5
Prepared by National Research Center, Inc.
Appendix III: Verbatim Responses to Openended Survey
Questions
Following are verbatim responses to open-ended questions as written on the
survey in the respondents’ own words, which have not been edited for spelling
or grammar. Within each question, the responses are in alphabetical order.
Question 28: Please tell us if there are any parts of the recycling system in Fort
Collins that don’t work for you or that you would like to see changed.
Comments related to cost
City should provide low-cost drop-off recycling of E-waste, Incl. Batteries, 2. City
should provide free drop-off recycling of scrap metal.
Curb side free service good.
Free curbside.
Free yard waste & other house hold recycling.
I like the free recycling program with Gallegos sanitation. If yard waste has free as well
that would be great.
I take my recycling to work and deposit in their bins. I think FTC should have a free
location to drop off.
I think it's great! The only thing that may not work for some people is the cost. I feel
really good filling my recycle bin full every 2 WKS!
If you make the recycle program voluntary and no cost. People will use it I believe
Need to have our company offer more pickups at curbside recycle without charging.
Recycling, including yard waste should be free. Curbside City should pick up leaves
raked into street in fall for compost (free).
The Taft hill land fill requires residents to pay too electronic and non-paper waste. Bad
Bad policy!!
Too expensive.
Too many containers for amount of storage area at residence - also too expensive.
We need a higher return like California or Michigan, than people will recycle, & it’s all
about money.
We recycle as long as it is free of charge. It currently is free through our waste removal
company.
Would like to see no charge for electronic waste recycle. For you can trough/piece into
the dump at a time.
Comments related to single or multi stream
1. Attract markets to purchase recycled water, 2. Reduce contamination in single.
Curbside recycling is co-mingled. Rivendell has too many separated bins - makes it a
pain to have 5! Bins at my house. Rivendell should have one co-mingled at least.
Attachment 3
Appendix VI
Page 6
Prepared by National Research Center, Inc.
Looks like a very inefficient process to co-mingle all recyclables only to have to
separate them later.
Paper should probably be separated rather than dumped in with everything else as it
used to be.
Separate bins for plastics & glass composting bins would be good too.
Single-stream trash/recycle should be implemented.
The curbside recycle program should require better sorting - it seems that most of the
material is being contaminated by broken glass & errant additions.
The drop-off site near riverside should be single-stream!
Comments related to item type
A definitive list of every item that can be recycle, i.e. TV dinner cartons & plastic
containers in them-cups (Wendy's) etc.
Add Styrofoam recycling; allow recycling of plastic food containers if washed.
Better pet waste recycling easier/better household chemical/hazardous waste
recycling.
Broader scope of curbside recycling (I.E. Styrofoam, electronics) composing should be
more encouraged/taught.
Can't recycle certain plastics, milk & juice cantons covered with plastic coating.
Electronic recycling is needed, I read the paper and inserts but never see anything.
Expand plastic recycling to include all types. Add green/composting recycling to single
homes.
For a city this size not to have yard waste drop-off should be felonious!! Idiots!!
I think it should be easier / encouraged to recycle household batteries.
I was not aware of the programs how do I recycle office paper all newspapers.
I was used to separating recyclables & recycling Polystyrene foam that should be
available.
I would like to know where old appliances, old computers, can be recycled.
I would like to see curbside glass recycle separated from the remaining co-mingled
material.
I would like to see more plastic recycling. Also, I would like a bottle/can deposit to
encourage recycling.
I'd love to know more about electronic waste recycling - I'm not aware of such a
program, & we need one!
I'm perpetually confused by what is recyclable and what is not. Jar lids? Clam shell
containers? A good, clear pouch that doesn't change would be great!
Improve explanation of acceptable items. Put sticker on recycling bins/boxes.
Is there a better way to recycle clothes paper clips, pencils etc.
I've heard rumors (from breweries) that the city does not actually recycle glass.
Knowing how clean items need to be in order to be recycled.
Milk cartons and the like should be recycled.
More accessible or better advertised electronics recycling.
Attachment 3
Appendix VI
Page 7
Prepared by National Research Center, Inc.
More signs available in stores as to what containers & numbers are accepted in Ft
Collins.
Need info on electronic waste.
Need option for Styrofoam.
Need to have recycling available for Styrofoam and yard waste.
Plastics are confusing; push for less packaging.
Please ban Telephone Company from issuing phone books unless requested by
customers.
Styrofoam collection. Reduction in trash cost for recycling implemented. Weekly pickup
please.
Styrofoam recycling should be added.
Take Styrofoam.
The descriptions on the Corr. Cardboard & paper board containers at the Rivendell site
need better details.
We should be able to recycle more types of plastic; electronics recycling should be
easier to access; should be able to recycle grocery bags in curbside recycle bins.
We use a lot of waxed cartons & aseptic packages (for tofu & soy milk). I'd like to be
able to recycle those. More frequent hazardous or pharmaceutical waste days. (Seems
like they happen when I'm out of town).
What is accepted for recycling can be confusing; would like to drop
batteries/electronics somewhere other than landfill.
Where can we take old TVs and computers for free disposal?
Would like to recycle Styrofoam.
Comments related to yard waste
Cheaper, year-long availability of the yard waste cars.
Drop off for electronic recycling, leaf recycling at parks, branches at parks, used oil at
more places, having more drop off days for paint etc.
Fort Collins should adopt the city of Loveland’s yard waste & recycling program.
Garbage companies provide yard waste pick up as part of package w/o high additional
cost.
Green waste (yard trimming) recycling should be easier.
I don't know but the yard trimmings program.
I have no obvious direction to go with yard waste.
I have to pay for yard trimmings at Hageman’s about 3 or 4 times a year - I wish our
neighbor would have a method of doing this.
I would like to see more yard waste recycling options since we don't compost.
In spring & fall, the city of Ft. Collins should have some type of tax break for private
waste trash services to pick up residential yard trimmings & leaves at no cost to
residents.
Love the curbside recycling. Curbside - or at least easy - yard waste would be helpful.
Need year-round curbside recycling for yard waste.
Attachment 3
Appendix VI
Page 8
Prepared by National Research Center, Inc.
No yard waste available in F.C.
Offer free yard waste recycling - possibly once per month.
Only small amount yard waste - would not deliver container for it pick up.
Please please please add a free yard waste/recycle program it would help everyone and
make for the city.
Residential curbside yard waste recycling would be great. We even had that in
Kentucky. Also, I don't think anyone should be required to recycle. But there should be
incentives.
The yard waste (above) would be great - Also a composting option!
What about composting or the programs in Boulder for compost in public buildings?
Would like to have a yard waste site to dispose of tree branches etc. available.
Yard trimming recycle sites are avail. But, for a cost. I don't mind recycling yard
trimmings, but I will not pay for it.
Yard trimmings - I'm not sure how/where to recycle my yard debris.
Yard waste recycling is good, saves Lar. Co money and improves land fill life and
quality. Make it free, it'll get used more.
Yard waste recycling would be good if it was a reasonable cost.
Comments related to increasing service (pickup, hours or locations)
Either extended hours or one extra Saturday per month to drop off electronics
recycling the WM facility.
Have to drive several miles to recycle oil, antifreeze or pay extra for yard trimmings.
I fill up my recycle more than my trash, but it only comes every other week. It should
be switched with trash pick-up.
I use Gallegos sanitation & they only pick up recycle cars every other week. Recycle
cars should be picked up every week.
I would recycle but unaware of location at City Park & Elizabeth St. Convenient enough
to walk trash too. It breaks my heart, really.
Instead of every two weeks pick up make it every week because it fills up too fast.
Larger recycling containers, our 95-gellon overflows at each every-other-week pickup.
More drop-off site for E-waste. No change on yard training.
More drop-offs for e-waste & household hazardous waste (Batteries, CFLS, etc.).
More electronic waste (ex. Batteries) drop-off sites.
More info & options on how to dispose of odd things I.E. Paint, Batteries.
More recycling.
Our bin gets too full and not everyone uses it properly.
Pick up once a week instead of every other week.
Plastic bag recycling needs to increase & be easier to access & do recycling pickups
should be more frequent in "non-home" areas (i.e. apartments, condos).
Recycling seems limited and not well known, provide better labels for what is
recyclable & build more infrastructures to support additional types of recycling.
See that everybody has access to a recycling system.
Attachment 3
Appendix VI
Page 9
Prepared by National Research Center, Inc.
Some areas in Fort Collins don't supply recycle bins to use.
The number of trucks that come down the street.
The public parks & Downtown should have recycling bins attached to or next to
(important that they are next to each other) the trash.
There could be more recycling bins in public areas / the biggest problem in this town
is traffic congestion and noise from traffic.
They cut down recycling pick up to every other week instead of weekly. So it gets too
full.
We as a sustainable city need! need! Recycle cans/bins in the old town area. I'm always
looking but they are not there.
We fill our recycling every two weeks - if it was provided every week we would recycle
almost everything.
We need more "drop off" dates for hazardous waste so people will use it - many won't
drive to landfill.
We would like to see weekly recycling return & the opportunity to recycle electronics &
yard waste at least.
Weekend hours for hazardous waste drop extended more electronic recycle resources.
Would like weekly pickup.
Comments related to multi-family dwellings
Awareness of recycling locations for those of us in apt. Complexes with no recycling.
Condo recycling by contractor.
Don't have enough room in the can provided at my S-apartment building.
Feel strongly about recycling not being available in condo/apartment units. It should
be available.
HOAs and condo associations should be required to offer recycling services.
I would like a recycling bin at our complex.
If you use a dumpster at a residence, GSI won't pick up recycling.
Many apartment complexes & do not have recycling bins - OR - the bins provided are
too few or in a very poor location.
Many apt complexes do not make recycling available to tenants.
More bias at my apartment complex (New Colony).
Multi-family apartments should be required to offer recycling.
My condo only provides for newspaper recycling, but everyone puts their cardboard in
there anyway. I would like it included.
My Prop. Management does not provide recycling. It is frustrating!
Recycle bins at apts. get filled quickly; it would be nice if more bins were provided.
There is no recycling option at my apartment complex, a separate GM for recycling
would most likely increase expending here.
General (uncategorized) comments
Container too small - need more frequent pick up.
Attachment 3
Appendix VI
Page 10
Prepared by National Research Center, Inc.
Don't know.
Eliminate vehicle listing cost exclude benefits.
Fort Collins is great @ recycling!
I think that people & Business should have the requirement to recycle, but some
people can’t afford it, they should be able to get assistance for the program.
Investing in a local recycling plant would cut down on recycle transport costs & provide
community jobs.
I've only lived in Ft. Collins since Sept. 2010 - Thus, I am less knowledgeable than
many residents!
Just moved here from Dallas, TX and compared to there, Y'all's recycling program is
outstanding!
Periodic info re recycling included in utility bills.
Recycling bins are constantly stolen by drunken college students, but not much can be
done about this.
Recycling mandates similar to the SF Bay area world be great.
So far, the current recycling system is working great.
The recycle Karts - Totters are too big we like the smaller 18 gal baskets better.
Trees in alleys need to be pruned regularly - city worst at it!
We are satisfied.
You can't make businesses & families; recycle - We need to continue to educate people
through schools & possibly when applying for small business.
Comments expressing disagreement
City has no business telling/forcing people to recycle.
I do not like government intervention in every aspect of our lives.
I don't believe it should cost extra $ and I don't support taxpayer subsidies on this
program. If it works economically it must stand on its own.
Keep it voluntary and keep Government out of my business and my home!! This survey
is very slanted!
Roads & efficient stop lights are much more important to me than this. Personal efforts
are important, but government should not spend trying to stop charges in climate. It's
a futile waste of money!
1
Waste Stream Study (Section 1)
and
Staff Recommendation for an Integrated
Recycling Facility
Presentation to City Council
March 27, 2012 Work Session
Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer
Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner
2
Background
• A goal for reaching 50% waste diversion by 2010
fell short (43%)
• Council requested addition work:
– Waste Stream Study (2010-11 budget)
– Integrated Recycling Facility Feasibility Study
(2011 KFCG project)
3
Road to Zero Waste – Systems Approach
4
Composition of Fort
Collins’ Waste
Stream (landfill)
5
Waste Stream Study (Section 1) Findings
• Green Waste makes up 29%
– Yard debris and wood, food scraps
• Construction & Demolition debris makes up 24%
– Drywall, rocks and cement, shingles, lumber
• Paper makes up 17%
– Cardboard, mixed grades paper, etc.
• Remaining 30% contains metal, plastics, appliances, glass
6
Waste Stream Study (Section 2) Findings
• Drafted – scheduled for Council review June 26
• Advanced systems to extract more materials of
value from the waste stream through:
– More sophisticated recycling/processing plant
– Compost/organic processes
– Waste conversion using ultra-low polluting
technology
7
Integrated Recycling Facility (IRF)
• Complete Feasibility Study available
– Modeled costs and volumes to recycle more
– Entire report on-line at
http://www.fcgov.com/recycling/reports.php
• Recommendation based on Feasibility findings
– Public review and comment
• Air Quality Advisory Board
• Natural Resources Advisory Board
• Open House March 22
8
Recommendation for New IRF
• A stand-alone facility located on City property
– Owned/managed by local government
– Operations potentially contracted out
– Built in phase 1, with expansion to phases 2, 3
– Collect variety of ‘hard-to-recycle’ materials
• IRF helps meet City’s goals:
– diverts more waste from landfill disposal
– reduces greenhouse gas emissions through
upstream savings in energy and avoided
landfill emissions
9
New Materials Recycled at an IRF
• Scrap metal, both steel and non-ferrous
– window frames, wiring, electric appliances etc.
• Rubble (concrete, rock, brick, asphalt, toilets, tile)
• Wood (dimensional lumber, plywood)
• Green Waste (yard debris, tree trimmings)
• Electronic Waste
• Others as needed
10
Opportunities & Benefits
• A convenient, one-stop recycling center that
accepts mixed loads will be used by:
– “self haulers”
– commercial contactors
– general public
• An IRF built in three phases will annually divert
7,719 - 19,500 tons of low-value discards
11
Capital Costs to Build an IRF
• Phase 1 will cost $747,000 to build
– Entire annual costs = $324,060
• Phase 2 does not add capital costs
– Entire annual costs = $441,064
• Expanding to Phase 3 is additional $705,000
– Entire annual costs = $823,742
12
Financial Considerations
• It is unlikely the private sector would build an IRF:
– Value of most materials is either low or negative
– Landfill fees in Colorado are very low
• A user fee would need to be lower than landfills to
create incentive for residents to deliver material for
recycling
• Staff recommends charging $3.75 per cubic yard (32%
lower than the landfill) to use the site so the City can
recover its costs
13
Conceptual Lay-out for IRF
14
Recommended Location
• Land on Timberline Road south of East Prospect
primary benefits of this location are:
– City-owned and undeveloped
– Large size (7.0 acres) for future expansion
– I zoning
– Compatible industrial adjacent land uses
– Centrally located
– Not visible from any residential areas
– Access off major arterial
15
Timberline Property
16
IRF, Plus Move Rivendell Recycling
Center (Riverside Drop-off) to IRF
• Initially, Phase 1 facility would accept 250
tons/day for recycling
• Relocate the current Recycling Center to the new
site for convenient one-stop-shop
– Consolidation saves $16,000 annually (rent)
17
IRF’s Impacts & Benefits
• Help accomplish the City’s 50% waste diversion goal
• Help accomplish Climate Action Plan goals for
reducing greenhouse gas emissions
• Close the gaps in infrastructure for recycling hard-to-
recycle materials
• Respond to citizens’ desire to divert more of the waste
stream from landfills
• With a gate fee of $3.75, costs break even
18
19