Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/13/2015 - COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTER AND OTHER ZERO WASTE INDATE: STAFF: October 13, 2015 Susie Gordon, Senior Environmental Planner Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Community Recycling Center and Other Zero Waste Initiatives. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to present information about four approaches to expanding citizens’ opportunities to divert more waste materials from landfill disposal, in the interests of implementing “Road to Zero Waste” strategies that will help the community reach adopted Zero Waste goals. The four approaches are: 1. Build a complete Community Recycling Center (CRC) for “hard-to-recycle-materials” as previously described at the June 23, 2015 work session. 2. Build a modified CRC “lite” at the same previously identified site (Timberline/East Prospect) that: a. does not accept green-waste/wood 3. Build a modified CRC “lite” at the same site that: a. does not accept green-waste/wood and b. is only open two days per week (not five) 4. Redirect efforts to a bundle of other strategies that support progress toward Zero Waste goals. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council have guidance on which of the four options to select? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Road to Zero Waste Plan in 2013 led to adoption of new goals for the community to reach: 75% waste diversion by 2020; then 90% by 2025; a goal of reducing the amount of waste generated per person to 2.8 pounds/day by 2025; and ultimately zero waste by 2030. Strategies to reach these goals that were identified included development of an expanded public collection site (beyond what is currently offered at the City’s Rivendell Recycling Center); more focus on the types of materials that are hard to recycle locally; and increasing the community’s capability for sorting/recycling glass, among other ideas. Paying for a new, expanded recycling center has been discussed in depth by the Council, and money is allocated that would provide complete funding for any of the four approaches that are listed above, including the full CRC facility or a modified version of the CRC, or, any/all of the new projects that are featured in a multi-pronged approach that would not entail constructing a facility. Substantial work was done for preparing to build the CRC at Timberline/East Prospect; however, due in part to recent changes in international recycling markets, a deep analysis of the operational costs showed the City would need to subsidize a bricks-and-mortar facility with a yearly budget of as much as $380,000. The “full CRC” has been designed to comprehensively meet citizens’ needs, with five days of operations/week and a list of materials that included, among other things, green-waste and wood. With that in mind, Council recently directed staff to include an offer for $380,000 in the mid-term Budgeting for Outcomes cycle for possible adoption as part of the 2016 budget. At Council’s direction, the CRC model was also evaluated to determine how much less it would cost to operate under several modified scenarios, either by thereby lowering costs for site personnel by reducing hours of October 13, 2015 Page 2 operation, and/or by removing green-waste/wood from the list of materials that would be accepted for recycling at the CRC (this type of material has high handling and disposal costs). CRC “lite” Version 1 would build the site as originally designed but no green-waste or wood would be accepted. Costs for this facility’s annual operations and maintenance would be $155,000. CRC “lite” Version 2 would also build the original facility, but in addition to removing green-waste and wood, the hours of operation would be reduced from five days per week to two days per week. The financial analysis shows that the City would need to budget $62,000 per year to run a CRC “lite” Version 2. Finally, also at Council’s request, a “bundle” of various other projects were modeled for their costs and for their waste-diversion impacts, including: 1. Hard-to-recycle-materials collection events held for one day at non-permanent locations 2. Expand program for collecting glass separately from other recyclables 3. Additional collection events for Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) materials 4. “Rivendell” Recycling Center #2; replicate the facility at a second location 5. Increased education and outreach, plus partnerships to expand Zero Waste opportunities Details of Three CRC Versions City’s Cost Staffing Metrics* $/ton 30-yr ** amortization CRC “full” (original) - Open five days per week 1. For-fee area open five days/week 2. Original complete list of hard-to- recycle materials - Green- waste and wood accepted 3. “Rivendell” area open seven days/week during daylight hours $1.7 M capital $380,000/yr O&M if six days/week and 100 visits/day $203,000/yr if five days/week and 40 visits/day No new City staff 2-3 vendor employees on-site Range of 1,500 to 3,200 tons /yr waste diverted from landfills in year 1 Year 5 = 6,735 tons $138 to $172/ton CRC “lite” Version 1 - Open five days per week 1. Excludes green- waste/wood from list of hard- to-recycle materials 2. “Rivendell” area open seven days/week during daylight hours $1.7 M capital $155-175,000/yr O&M No new City staff 2 October 13, 2015 Page 3 Details of “Bundled” New Initiatives to Support Progress at Meeting Zero Waste Goals City’s Cost Staffing Metrics* $/ton; 30-yr amortization Bundle of New Projects to Support Progress Toward Zero Waste Goal General Descriptions: Five different projects, independent of one another, that help reach community goals for waste diversion and recycling. Bundled Project 1.1: Host Three (3) Hard-to-recycle-materials collection events annually General description: Follows model of City of Longmont’s one-day events held three times/year to collect electronic waste, books, durable plastics, fires extinguishers, Styrofoam, porcelain, textiles. Additional note: the outcome of this project is “embedded” in CRC model 1. Use parking lots or rented space for events 2. Collect scrap metal, batteries, latex paint, Styrofoam, and electronic waste (largest volumes will be from e- waste) 3. Would not include green-waste/wood Partner with local recyclers, in addition to contracting services for a hauling vendor capable of marketing materials Business model: Private contractor hired to manage materials and run events. City augments staffing, sets up, publicizes. $22,000/yr (3 events) .50 FTE new City staff year 1 .25 FTE in subsequent years Vendor hires event workers 35 tons year waste diverted (mostly electronics) 300-350 users per collection event $629/ton Bundled Project 1.2: Separated glass recycling - bins throughout community General Description: Expand program for collecting glass separately from other recyclables to enhance dollar values of materials and optimize amount of glass recovered; some elements of this project are already beginning to be implemented as a pilot. Additional note: the outcome of this project is “embedded” in CRC model 1. Private sector creates network of glass-only collection bins around Fort Collins. 2. Less glass in curbside recycling makes collection more efficient, saves haulers money, optimizes glass recycled. Build central collection bunker where glass is October 13, 2015 Page 4 City’s Cost Staffing Metrics* $/ton; 30-yr amortization 1. Establish two additional community-wide events for HHW materials. 2. Increases events to four per year. Contract with vendor to provide collection services. Business model: Professional contractor manages HHW. City provides some staff levels at events, set-up, and publicity. $140,000/yr additional for HHW service contractor $22,500 City staff year 1; $11,250 in subsequent years .5 FTE new City staff year 1 .25 FTE subsequent years 60 tons/yr* 880 users per collection event $2,334/ton after year 1 * Costs for handling and disposing of the acutely toxic (highly regulated) materials that are collected at HHW events are unavoidably high. Bundled Project 1.4: “Rivendell #2” General Description: Create a second recycling center that creates greater convenience for citizens. Additional note: the outcome of this project is not “embedded” in CRC model 1. Create replica (second) of Rivendell Recycling Center at a new location 2. New site geographically located for convenience to citizens, i.e., fewer miles of travel for users who live farther away from the current site Business model: City runs recycling site; hires hauler to deliver commodities to market; retains share of price obtained if/when commodities have value. Minimum* $105,000 capital costs (equipment only) $50,000/yr O&M $11,500/yr City staff .25 FTE October 13, 2015 Page 5 Staff Recommendations Staff recommends approving construction of the CRC Version 2, whereby green-waste is not accepted in the interests of prudent fiscal management. We think it offers significant social benefits to the community, supports the culture of recycling and waste diversion in Fort Collins that is critical to achieving progress on zero waste goals and the Climate Action Plan Framework, and preserves the site for the unique opportunities it presents for future development of small scale waste-to-energy or expanded resource recovery. ATTACHMENTS 1. Community Recycling Center site map (PDF) 2. Recycling Center Agenda Item Summary, June 23, 2015 (PDF) 3. Work Session Summary, June 23, 2015 (PDF) 4. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Community Recycling Center Fort Collins, CO Original Concept Rendering and Site Map ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: STAFF: June 23, 2015 Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Susie Gordon, Senior Environmental Planner WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Community Recycling Center Operational Costs. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to present information about the estimated range of ongoing operational costs of the new Community Recycling Center (CRC) for “hard-to-recycle-materials” and to discuss options going forward. A public collection site for hard-to-recycle-materials is one of the City's strategies for achieving its goal of Zero Waste. Funding has been secured to construct the site and significant progress has been made in preparing to build the CRC at Timberline/East Prospect. In 2015, staff and the potential site operator developed a Profit & Loss (P&L) analysis that applies a set of key assumptions (e.g., number of visits, volume of material collected) and forecasts costs to run the facility. Based on these assumptions, the net annual operating expenses could be in the range of $200-$300K per year. It was originally envisioned that a private contractor would be able to operate the site and cover operational expenses by charging a small gate fee. However, the market for recyclable commodities has changed recently. It is likely that a small gate fee will not cover all the operational expenses, and City support will be needed to provide this innovative service to the community. Staff will seek guidance from Council about its interest in: (A) supporting on-going operational costs,( B) scaling back the site construction to move existing recycling center only and thereby reduce financial risk, but preserve future options, or( C) placing the project on hold or terminating it. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council have guidance on the Community Recycling Center (CRC), considering unanticipated, ongoing operating costs? 2. What direction does Council have regarding the three options identified? A. Support a mid-cycle BFO proposal that would identify ongoing funding, starting in 2016, for operating the new Community Recycling Center B. Undertake only as much development on the new CRC site necessary to move the existing recycling center to the City-owned location, thereby postponing the "hard-to-recycle-materials" area of the CRC C. Place the project on hold or terminate work on building a new CRC. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION A public collection site for hard-to-recycle-materials is one of the City's strategies for achieving its goal of Zero Waste and significant progress has been made in preparing to build the CRC at Timberline/East Prospect. The plan includes two areas where separate activities will occur:  On the east side nearest Timberline Road, the relocated "Rivendell" Recycling Center will operate as usual (for free, seven days/week during daylight hours, unstaffed). This element of the CRC project has its own, separate funding for O&M ($66,000 annually, as approved in the 2014 BFO process). The ATTACHMENT 2 June 23, 2015 Page 2 Rivendell Recycling center is currently located adjacent to Rivendell School, and accepts “traditional” recyclables such as paper, cardboard, bottles and cans etc.  Farther back on the property, a completely new facility will operate (open during regular business hours, staffed, visitors charged a gate fee), which will accept a variety of new materials for recycling, including several construction and demolition (C&D) wastes, paint and other low-toxicity household wastes, and old/obsolete electronic equipment. Permits have been obtained and Connell Resources is prepared to break ground on the 5-acre Timberline property, which is owned by the City, as soon as notified to proceed. Signage has been planned to notify patrons of the current Rivendell Recycling Center about the upcoming facility. (Attachment 1) An original budget of $750,000 for the CRC was approved in 2013. Financial setbacks slowed the project in 2014, when capital construction costs were found to be higher than estimated, bringing the total cost estimate up to $1.7M. In 2014, Council approved an additional $1.0M for construction in 2015. Resuming work in December to develop the new facility, staff in ESD and Finance began working in earnest with the private sector vendor selected through the 2014 RFP process to be the site operator (Waste-Not Recycling). Several conclusions were reached through this collaborative process. One was the suggestion to increase the number of vendor employees, from one person to two full-time people, in the interests of providing sufficient customer service. As a result, expenses to pay site attendants, which represent a significant part of the O&M costs, were effectively doubled. Secondly, the City team created a detailed P&L spreadsheet for the CRC's income stream (gate fees and rebates from saleable commodities) and expenses, including the vendor's overhead and freight/trucking costs. Modeled estimations for a range of net operational costs were identified to be between $200,000 and $300,000. A worst- case-scenario could result in as much as $400,000 per year in the unlikely event of several worst case variables occurring simultaneously. Negotiations with the vendor have not yet concluded, and staff feels there are several potential operational cost reductions that can be implemented. The P&L modeling was undertaken to reduce the City's financial risks, to the extent possible, that come with innovations such as a drop-off center for hard-to-recycle materials. Unfortunately, few examples exist for Fort Collins to use as comparable models; although some communities in the US have built this type of facility, information was hard to obtain about how they finance the O&M costs. A non-profit organization, Ecocycle, operates a Center for Hard-to-Recycle-Materials (called "CHaRM") in Boulder. Differences in which materials are accepted vary significantly, but the project does clearly demonstrate how usage grows (from 15 trips/day in 2002 to 115 trips/day in 2013) and how it also gives Boulder the ability to expand the types of materials accepted locally, as viable markets for recycling emerge. The CHaRM started off accepting two materials, and now collects 14 materials due to additional markets and relationships built with local small-scale manufacturers.) The unknowns/inherent risks of running a CRC that will influence net operational costs include:  Difficult to estimate the number of customers who will use the site, especially at first while people learn about it  Impossible to accurately estimate how much volume of material people will bring with each visit  Gate fees modeled at $5/visit (excludes those dropping off paint) and proposed volume-based fees for green waste and wood do not offset expenses  Prices from sales of recyclable commodities cannot be reliably predicted to offset expenses because of market volatility  Currently commodities are at all-time lows; while income from sales of materials such as scrap metal are anticipated to rise, it is much lower than estimated just one year ago  If large amounts of low-value material (e.g., green waste and wood waste) are received at the CRC, it skews operational expenses because of these materials' higher handling/disposal costs, compared to commodities that have value (e.g. scrap metal, cardboard.) Another discussion item that emerged during Q1 of 2015 is the proposal to host the City's biannual Household Hazardous Waste collection events at the CRC. Staffed by Utilities, these events have been held since their June 23, 2015 Page 3 inception in 2009 at a parking lot on the campus of Colorado State University (Lake and College). Due to CSU's development plans, the Lake Street parking lot is no longer available for the City to use and a new location needs to be found. In collaboration with the Environmental Services Department, Utilities has agreed that the Timberline CRC would be a good venue for holding the HHW collection days, once the new facility is open. Summary of Benefits Based on staff’s 13 years of experience running the Rivendell Recycling Center, it is anticipated the CRC will be highly used and appreciated, just as Rivendell has been very popular, an asset in which many citizens seem to take great pride of ownership. There are a number of strikingly similar circumstances between development of Rivendell in 2001 and today's efforts to build an expanded recycling center. The Rivendell facility was built about 15 years after recycling was introduced to the Fort Collins community in the mid-to-late 1980s. A goal of 50% waste diversion had just been adopted in 1999, and the public's growing interest and demand required the City to respond to citizen expectations for greater opportunities to recycle. Now, with passage of another 13 years, the City is gearing up to respond to even higher expectations for recycling more types of materials, and for meeting new goals aimed at sending even less waste to landfills. In 2002, the City had little idea of how much growth in usage (currently 400 visits on average daily) and tonnage (1,500 tons/year) would occur at Rivendell. At the CRC, advanced recycling opportunities that are in high demand by citizens will be accessible and actionable, providing more avenues to achieving Zero Waste goals and implementing the Climate Action Plan (CAP). Initially, the CRC may experience low levels of usage, but from staff’s experience seeing how much citizens of Fort Collins respond to expanded opportunities to recycle, it is anticipated the number of visits would likely grow rapidly, to as many as 100 per day. In drawing further comparison, the Rivendell Recycling Center costs approximately $66,000/year to operate (which includes $16,500 lease payments to the school). With 1,500 tons/year now being conservatively modeled for the CRC, the amount of material recycled at the CRC, at minimum, will be equal to the amount recycled at Rivendell. The CRC will support goals adopted in the 2013 Road to Zero Waste, not only by diverting a conservatively estimated 1,500 tons/ year of new material from landfill disposal, but by providing positive experiences for citizens that motivate them to take even further action to reduce waste. The amount of additional greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) that will be avoided, 2,350 tons estimated in the first year, will help support goals adopted for the 2014 CAP. The CRC is one of the primary tactics identified in the 2015 CAP Framework Plan, as a way to recycle more materials (thereby reducing GHG emissions from energy required to manufacture new products and avoiding emissions caused during mineral resources extraction), help people gain confidence in their ability to undertaken even greater sustainability practices in their daily lives, and divert waste from being landfilled (a disposal method that generates methane emissions, a significant source of GHG). The CRC will give citizens more ability to appropriately manage the types of household hazardous waste (HHW) that are generated at the residential level. On a year-round basis, four materials (antifreeze, batteries, oil, and paint, or ABOP for short) can be brought to the recycling center. On two occasions each year, the CRC would function as the host site for residents to bring all types of residential HHW during the Utility's popular HHW collection days (the May 30 event this year broke previous years' attendance records, with well over 1,000 visits). The CRC's year-round activities to collect ABOP would reduce costs for the biannual HHW round-ups, and therefore the Utility Department foresees having $25,000 available annually to help support the recycling center's operations and maintenance costs. Staff suggests that providing annual funding for operating the CRC will provide social benefits to the community, support the culture of recycling that is critical to achieving progress on zero waste goals and the Climate Action Plan Framework, and preserve the site for the unique opportunities it presents for future development of small scale waste-to-energy or expanded resource recovery. If directed, staff is prepared to develop a budget "offer" to introduce into the process for making mid-cycle BFO revisions. To ensure a budget is adopted that is sufficient to June 23, 2015 Page 4 address the uncertainties inherent in new and "uncharted" initiatives, staff recommends an initial annual budget of $300,000 to cover anticipated net operating expenses. To control costs, staff submits the following ideas for consideration:  Limit the amount of green/wood waste accepted at the CRC o establish policy of charging an amount (i.e., $7.00 per cubic yard fee when customers bring green/wood waste (it is important to note that the public already has the option of using one of the two local businesses that accept woody/organic materials for less than $7.00 per yard) o these are the materials for which management/dispose costs are highest o disallow use by commercial landscapers or arborists  Establish a policy that limits the volume of materials that are more costly to process (green waste and yard waste). o For example, customers could be limited to 2 cubic yards of these commodities. o until it is established how much usage the CRC can absorb, setting limits for customers will help prevent being overwhelmed by volumes Expenses to operate the CRC facility will receive close scrutiny by staff in partnership with the contractor, Waste- Not Recycling. Starting at the outset, joint monthly financial meetings will be held to enable fast adaptation for most efficiently managing the site. As a highly experienced company with a long track record as a successful recycling business, Waste-Not will be committed to helping find ways to reduce costs such as freight charges, and to improve commodity values (e.g., by installing a baler for cardboard), as well as developing opportunities to expand the list of materials that people can bring to the CRC as recycling markets open up for them. Pros and Cons of Options Identified by Staff A. Mid-cycle BFO proposal that would identify ongoing funding, starting in 2016, for operating the new Community Recycling Center  May provide sufficient degree of assurance to proceed with construction and to open the CRC now, if it is known that Council's approval is likely to be given in November for costs of O&M in 2016  Enables staff to spend $68,000 of state grant money by deadline of June 30 for purchase of CRC equipment (collection bins) if City is confident that construction of the site will proceed as described in the grant application  Meets the aspirations and desires of the community and helps address adopted City goals  Provides greatest return on the City's investment of time and resources already made, to date, in developing and planning the project (approximately $175,000, including $70,000 on engineering costs, $41,000 on project manager salary, and $28,000 for tree-moving)  Provides host site for City's highly successful collection events for household hazardous waste, in collaboration with the Utilities Department  Annual O&M costs defrayed by $25,000 from HHW collection events budget  Opens up options for contracted operator to host other discretionary, special-material collection events, e.g., block Styrofoam, on occasional basis  Leaves opportunities open for developing future phases of CRC on west-most portion of site, e.g., pilot project to demonstrate waste-to-energy technology such as bio-digester system that could potentially fuel a nearby recreational facility.  Location provides potential for industrial symbiotic system, whereby businesses in adjacent industrial park or artisan village could use material collected at CRC to make products B. Build the site to a level of construction that allows staff to proceed with moving the "Rivendell" Recycling Center to the City's property on Timberline Road  Altered plan would complete all preliminary work except paving for the west portion, allowing Center for Hard-to-Recycle-Materials to be built at later date June 23, 2015 Page 5  Allows the City to initiate the CRC project at a known level of O&M that is already funded, the "Rivendell" activities were included in the 2014-15 budget  Saves the City $16,500 in annual payments to the Rivendell School from which property is leased  Encourages the public to become acquainted with location of new City drop-off site, therefore, in the long run an expanded drop-off site is more familiar for people to use  Activates project to construct the site using: o fully engineered plans o permits that are already obtained o funding already in-hand to pay for earth-moving, electrical installation, drainage, and paving work  Postpones expenditure of roughly $150,000 of the budget for doing the paving work  Allows time to further evaluate costs and funding mechanism to pay O&M for the "hard-to-recycle- materials" portion of the CRC in future BFO processes  Relatively undeveloped area on west side of site could function as space for holding special-material collection (such as Styrofoam etc.) events conducted by contracted operator. C. Place the CRC project on hold, or terminate it  Prevents staff from expending more time working on the CRC  Helps City avoid risks associated with change and innovation  Leaves implementation of this important new measure to reach Zero Waste goals and Climate Action Plan goals unfulfilled  Incurs disappointment among members of the public who have been looking forward to completion of the CRC  Represents lost investment of staff time and other resources that have been expended during 2013-15 Guidance from City Council will determine next steps for the CRC. ATTACHMENTS 1. Banner for Rivendell Recycle Center (PDF) 2. Staff memo, May 1, 2015 (PDF) 3. Staff memo re: Household hazardous waste collection events at CRC, April 23, 2015 (PDF) 4. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) ATTACHMENT 3 1 Community Recycling Center & Other Zero Waste Options Lucinda Smith and Susie Gordon 10-13-15 ATTACHMENT 4 Question for Council Does Council have guidance on which of four options to select? 1. Complete Community Recycling Center (CRC) for “hard-to-recycle-materials” 2. CRC “lite” that does not accept green-waste/wood (open 5 days/week) 3. CRC “lite” that does not accept green-waste/wood (open 2 days/week) 4. Redirect efforts to a bundle of other strategies that support Zero Waste goals Projects’ Support of Council Policy • Resource conservation and waste prevention • Greenhouse gas reductions from recycling • Extends life of landfills • Larimer County Landfill has 10 year life expectancy • Supports Council-adopted goals • Working toward zero waste goal • Climate Action Plan goals 3 Chronology of Recycling Collection Projects 4 Electronic Waste Annual Collection Events 2000-04 Open Rivendell Recycling Center 2002 2013 2015 electronics landfill ban 2009 cardboard landfill ban 2012 Feasibility Study for Expanded Recycling Center; followed by Council Review, BFO Offer, project design, 2015 ongoing discussions 1999 goal: 50% waste diversion by 2010 Goal: 75% diversion by 2020 2007 Start biannual collection events for HHW 2012 Three Variations for New Recycling Center City’s costs Metrics Cost/ton; 30-yr amortization i.e., return on investment Other CRC “full” $1.7 M capital $380,000/yr O&M if 100 visits/day $203,000/yr if 40 visits/day 1,500 to 3,200 tons /yr waste diverted from landfills in year 1 Year 5 = 6,700 tons $138 to $172/ton Open 7 days/week in no-fee “Rivendell” area • For 5 days/week, new area takes scrap metal, aggregate, ABOP, E- waste, green-waste, & wood, for $5 fee CRC “lite” V1 $1.7 M capital $155,000/yr (O&M) 1,100 tons/yr waste diverted from landfills Year 5 = 1,200 tons $194/ton • Same as “full” CRC except no green-waste or wood CRC “lite” V2 $1.7 M capital $62,000/yr O&M 1,000 tons/yr waste diverted Year 5 = 1,000 tons $124/ton • Same as above except new area limited to 2 days/week Bundle of Alternative Zero-Waste Projects City’s costs Metrics Cost/ton; 30-yr amortization i.e., return on investment Other Collection events for new items $22,000/yr (3 events) 35 tons year waste diverted (mostly electronics) $629/ton Accept scrap metal, batteries, latex paint, Styrofoam, e-waste Glass collection $20,000 capital (one-time costs for bunker) + $5,000/yr O&M 300 tons/yr glass $19/ton Creates more glass-only collection sites HHW collection $151,250/yr 60 tons/yr Various household hazardous wastes $2,334/ton Creates two more HHW events per year Alternative Zero-Waste Projects, continued City’s costs Metrics Cost/ton; 30-yr amortization i.e., return on investment Other Build second “Rivendell” > $105,000 capital costs (for equipment only) $61,500 yr O&M 750 tons/yr $87/ton Creates second City drop- off site to replicate Rivendell Recycling Center that provides convenience to citizens who live farther away from the current site Education and partnerships Range of $50- 100,000/year 250 tons/yr (estimate only) $390/ton (estimate only) Promote free concrete recycling at Crushing facility; promote more backyard composting; regional planning and other partnerships that create economic opportunities One-page Comparison of Options Annual O&M costs Capital Costs Tons/year Cost/ton CRC “full” $380,000 or $203,000 $1.7 M 1,500 to 3,200 (6,700 Year 5) $138 to $172 CRC “lite” V1 $155,000 $1.7 M 1,100 waste (1,200 Year 5) $194 CRC “lite” V2 $62,000 $1.7 M 1,000 (1,000 Year 5) $124 Events to collect new items $22,000 NA 35 $629 Glass collection $5,000 $20,000 300 $19 HHW collection $151,250 NA 60 $2,334 Second “Rivendell” $61,500 > $105,00 750 $87 Education, partnerships $50-100,000 NA 250 (estimate only) $390 8 Question for Council Does Council have guidance on which of four options to select? 1. Complete Community Recycling Center (CRC) for “hard-to-recycle-materials” 2. CRC “lite” that does not accept green-waste/wood (open 5 days/week) 3. CRC “lite” that does not accept green-waste/wood (open 2 days/week) 4. Redirect efforts to a bundle of other strategies that support Zero Waste goals CRC Location 10 11 North CRC Original Concept Rendering …. Timberline Road Electric Substation new City staff to maintain site for safety and cleanliness Services provided by private sector 750 tons/yr $87/ton *Caveat: initial capital costs will range depending on conditions of new site (e.g., installing power, paving, or traffic management issues are unknown potential costs) Bundled Project 1.5: Increase education and seek partnerships to expand Zero Waste opportunities General Description: Provide more information to citizens about ways to become engaged, and increase collaborative efforts with local recycling companies to improve opportunities to divert waste. Additional note: the outcome of this project is not “embedded” in CRC models 1. Promote free concrete /asphalt recycling available at Hoffman Mill Road Crushing facility. 2. Promote more backyard composting. 3. Regional planning for County Landfill; focus on organics, compost. Create Recycling & Reuse Economic Development Cluster. $50,000 to 75,000/yr* (printing, advertising, etc.) $22,500/yr City staff 50 FTE new City staff 250 tons/yr (estimate only) $390/ton (estimate only) *Caveat: Costs are variable depending on extent of outreach and education goals desired. Summary of Benefits In addition to providing citizens with a level of new recycling services, a long-standing request often heard from residents, new projects and initiatives that are described here will keep Fort Collins moving forward in its quest to achieve zero waste and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. aggregated, then loaded for optimal freight, delivery to end users. Business model: Operated by private sector; vendor provides collection bins, City helps publicize, also builds/owns glass bunker. Operated by private sector* in partnership with City; vendor provides collection bins, City provides support, also builds/owns glass bunker. City’s Cost* $20,000 capital (one-time costs for one bunker) $5,000/yr O&M 300 tons/yr glass recycled separately $19/ton * City is already starting to work with a start-up glass recycler to initiate a pilot collection route in Fort Collins; ongoing costs predicated on company’s business plan (i.e., uncertainty exists). Bundled Project 1.3: Additional household hazardous waste (HHW) collection events General Description: Expand City program from 2 collection events to 4 collection events per year. Additional note: the outcome of this project is 50-75% “embedded” in CRC model vendor employees on site 1,092 tons/yr waste diverted from landfills Year 5 = 1,229 tons $194/ton CRC “lite” Version 2 - Open two days per week 1. For-fee area open two days/week 2. Excludes green-waste/wood from list of hard-to-recycle materials 3. “Rivendell” area open seven days/week during daylight hours $1.7 M capital $62-82,000/yr O&M No new City staff 2 vendor employees on site 954 tons/yr waste diverted Year 5 = 1,074 tons $124/ton * Calculations do not include 1,500 tons/year recyclables from existing (“Rivendell”) site ** 30-year amortization implies site continues to be in use “as is” for 30 years with no new capital costs.