Loading...
EQECA 11/12/2013 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND ENERGY COMMISSION Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Ave Ne Agenda Packet Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2013, 7:00 p.m. AGENDA Conference Room A (Main Level) Location: Call to Order Introductions Approve Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Minutes: July 9, 2013 (attached) and September 10, 2013 (attached) New Business Report from Metro Cities seminar GreenStep Cities workshop: better buildings, measuring, retrofitting & financing to save energy. Information about energy benchmarking and retrofitting opportunities to reduce energy use through budget neutral programs Other Review and approval of 2014 EQEC meeting dates (attached) Old Business Discussion and recommendation for Council regarding organized garbage collection. Next Meetings/Announcements Tuesday, January 14 , 2013, 7 p.m., Conference Room A (Main Level) Adjourn City of Fridley: Achieving Solid Waste Goals through Open or Organized Solid Waste Collection Systems ‘’ #®¬¬´­¨³¸ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ %­µ¨±®­¬¤­³ « 0« ­­¨­¦ 3³ ¥¥ 2¤¯®±³ 1 Table of Contents I. Introduction and Background II. EQEC, Prior Study of Organized Solid Waste Hauling 2009-2011 III. Currently Licensed Fridley Solid Waste Haulers IV. Costs and Benefits: Open (current) or Organized Solid Waste Removal Systems New State of Minnesota V. Organized Collection Legislation and Procedures VI. Impact of Garbage Trucks on Our Roads VII. Safety, Noise and Air Pollution in Our Neighborhoods VIII. Program Design for Future Organics Collection and Improving Recycling IX. Conclusion and Staff Recommendations X. Appendix and Further Reading I. Introduction and Background Introduction The State of Minnesotafostering an integrated waste management system to protect the other natural resources and the This Act gives the following order of preference for waste management practices: 1. Waste reduction and reuse 2. Recycling 3. Composting of yard waste and food waste 4. Resource recovery through mixed municipal solid waste compost 5. Land disposal (landfill) that does not produce methane gas orhich captures the gas to use as fuel for the production of energy (https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=115A&view=chapt). The State Office of Environmental Assistanceinimize land filling, with an increased focus on maximizing reduction, reuse, source-separated , is not current offered to Fridley residents by all five licensed Fridley solid waste haulers City of Fridley goals for the removal of solid waste from the community include a commitment to: Have an environmentally-sound solid waste disposal program Move toward practices and systems that are the least impactful on City budgetary items especially residential roadways Reduce the burden of code enforcement cases relating to residents who are non-compliant regarding garbage service Demonstrate commitment to community health improvements: 1) Increase safety in our residential neighborhoods to encourage walking and biking 2) Reduce air pollution 3) Decrease noise impacts in residential areas Increase the tonnage of recycling removed from garbage Incorporate collection of organic food waste Follow directives from Anoka County and the State of Minnesota to reduce the solid waste stream This report about open or organized waste collection includes th Open System As of November, provide refuse collection as a utility service but city code requires property owners to have trash service. Residents contract independently with one of the five haulers licensed to collect their solid waste. An is operated entirely by private operators with few options for input and system improvement by the City. reporting roadway and neighborhood impacts and investigation of service and pricing options are a . The city and other governmental agencies only interact with haulthere is a significant environmental problem like a spill or a large number of complaintshas limited authority to require improved performance. Organized Collection System Organized collection means a system for collecting solid waste i of an organization of collectors, is authorized to collect from a defined geographic service area or areas some or all of the solid waste that is released by generators fo A city or town may organize solid waste collection, after public notification and hauler notwhich is contractually controlled by the City. This is based on recent Minnesota State Statute 115A.94, which governs procedures relating to organized collection of solid waste (see Chapter IV.). This staff report will discuss and evaluate the components associated with conversion to organized collection of solid waste and review the process and citizen inp If there is sufficient interest for the City Council to move forward to request a proposal for organized collection, staff would follow rules stipulated in MN Statute 115A.04 as summarized in Section V. If organized collection is adopted, the City of Fridley would not own or operate trucks for providing this service, but negotiate the details of a contract which is prepared by all of existing licensed haulers basing collection by zone and their current percentage of busine This would create an organized refuse collection system consisting of the five licensed hauling companies assigned to specific areas within the City. They would work out a contract proposal to the City. If accepted and implemented, the city would monitor contract compliance. Under organized trash collection, the City would likely manage the financial functions of the contract. The Finance Department would bill residents for solid waste collection services in conjunction with the billing for water and sewer services. The City would pay solid waste disposal fees County and be invoiced by the haulers for collection of refuse and recycling materials. The collection service would be provided to all single family and multiple unit dwellings of twelve or less (similar to -sort recycling structure). The following are a few of the Metro area Cities which have adopted organized garbage collection. Of the group, Champlclosely resemble the organized collection system under evaluation in Fridley, closely matching the new MN statutes procedures. St. Louis Park Blaine Champlin Columbia Heights Maplewood, Bayport North St. Paul Forest Lake Robbinsdale Stillwater Afton Centerville Circle Pines Marine on St. Croix Background: Fridley Citizen Participation At an October, 2009 City Council meeting, a Fridley resident com trucks using City streets and asked that the City convert to an "organized" collection system. Later in 2009, to respond to him and to others who raised this issue during neighborhood street construction meetings, the City published a December, 2009 newsletter article which askFridley residents to report their preferences to Mayor Scott Lund. A survey (see appendix) was sent out indicating enough community interest for further study of organized garbage collection. The issue then was moved to the Fridley Environmental Quality and Energy Commission (EQEC which agreed to study the two types of garbage collection systems, open (current) and organized. The EQE Commission focused on different aspects of garbage hauling at five meetings, detailed below. Since that time, phone calls, emails and citizen input at meetininterest or asked for action to move toward organized collection. Some citizens have stated that organized collection represents an intrusion into a private option to choose their own solid waste removal contractor and are not in favor of a change from open to organized collection. II. EQEC Study of Organized Waste Hauling Issues 2009-2013 The impetus for this report to the Environmental Quality and Ene Fridley was to conclude their three year examination of the elem of solid waste and move toward a recommendation to the Fridley City Council. A favorable vote by Council licensed haulers. From 2010-ed solid waste haulers, studied different aspects of garbage collec Appendix) and reviewed research materials. 2009 Interest in organized collection began in 2009 due to homeowners input af reconstruction projects. The topic has emerged periodically over the years when residents ask questions about consolidating the number of garbage trucks they encounter s on residential streets. 2010 April 2010. EQEC Panel Discussion Part I: Benefits and challenges of implementing a city-wide organized garbage collection took place. City Manager Burns, in response to residents concerns wrote a series of newsletter articles to inform citizens. Residents responded to ests for input with more than 3 to 1 comments in favor of organized garbage hauling. Sig Scheurle, Planning Director from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff presented key points Organized Garbage Collection Systems: Cities with organized collection have incentives to reduce waste residents and customers are shown to reduce waste. Cities can incentivize property owners to reduce trash. Recycling capture rates are higher with organized garbage programs. A MPCA study showed that 73% of US Cities outside of Minnesota have one hauler for garbag while (at that time)only 29 % of Minnesota cities have one hauler picking up trash neighborhood Garbage trucks, both empty and full are among the heaviest on the road, based on axle weight. A city with organized collection effectively manages the trash c for households. According to the MPCA, national literature consistently shows lo organized collection. Minnesota studies between 1993 and 2004 show lower costs for org Reduced air pollution and truck noise are pluses The city would need to plan for administrative costs. Haulers oppose organized collection because they lose flexibility in pricing. Some comparisons from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency end showed pricing advantages for the organized system. May 2010. Discussion with Fridley City Attorney, Fritz Knaaky stated that open meeting laws will be assessed state and local law as it observed. The collection system cannot impair recycling and he relates to garbage collection. July 2010. City staff panelists from the following Cities provided input: Blaine, Robbinsdale, Columbia Heights. Key points involved discussion around how yard waste w appliances and electronics and bulks items would be charged or if a monthly drop-off in one location for those items would be more cost-effective. Robbinsdale does not credit snowbirds and does charg larger carts. September 2010. Air quality in terms of CO emissions, greenhouse gas reduction and neighborhood 2 health impacts were discussed. Natural gas engines and battery powered vehicles are two promising possibilities gaining popularity in the hauling industry. Noise concerns. October 2010. Peter Sandhei, a staff member from the Minnesota Pollution Control ommission (MPCA) response to a directive from the Minnesota Legislature. This report included detailed reports defining the systems currently in place in many of Minnesota cities, of their performance. Mr. Sandhei also noted that several citiesbbinsdale, Roseville and substantial fees to compensate the City for undefined damages to will test the relatively small revenues for the City. Mr. Scheurle warned that pursuing organized collection solidarity of the City Council because they will run into opposi November 2010. EQEC invited Fridley's haulers to share their points of view on . open collection systems. Generally, those speaking in favor of organized collection at th garbage hauler who is selected through a competitive bidding pro Fridley residents than a system where each resident negotiates separately with multiple Proponents also argue that having one garbage hauler on all City save wear and tear on City streets and reduce the amount of air pollution in the City's neighborhoods. The haulers appear to have somewhat different points-of-view depending upon whether they are local or national haulers. The local haulers are more fiercely protective argue that they have spent years developing their customer base a arbitrarily eliminated. They also argue that competition among m than a system where there is only one hauler. Although there is some evidence that organized collection systems cost residents less, they argue that the wide variety of organized and open collection systems makes price comparison dif organized collection systems produce less carbon dioxide emissio point out that they have made many environmentally-friendly improvements to their garbage trucks. They also argue that evidence linking garbage trucks to wear and tear on streets is largely anecdotal; moreover, they say factors such a street design, driving habits, and age o determinants of street wear and tear. In an informal survey, some Commissioners called various haulers and found out that their pricing was not consistent especially if a resident decided to reduce the size o Also in November 2010. Part 4 Panel Discussion led by City Manager Dr. Burns: EnImpact of Garbage Trucks on City Streets, a discussion of gas, diesel, bio-fuel and natural gas burning garbage trucks. January 2011. The EQEC agreed to continue the studying the issue and conduct a more formal survey (see Appendix) by asking a random sample of Fridley residents for their opinions on garbage collection. Potential survey respondent were notified that they were selecte followed by a question. The results were published in a City ne discussed by the EQEC. 2013 In 2013, discussions of organized collection will reflect the recent State of Minneso instead of haulers competing to become the solitary provider to resident currently licensed with a city would continue to do business in matches the percentage of business they have in the city and collect solid waste from every house in that zone. A change would mean one truck for one neighborhood pickin few stops in every neighborhood. III. Currently Licensed Fridley Solid Waste Haulers Class I is the designation for residential solid waste collectors and does not include apartments. Currently licensed are the following businesses: 1.Ace Solid Waste, Inc. 2.Allied Waste/Republic Services 3.LePage & Sons 4.Walters Recycling and Refuse 5.Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc. As verified by the Manager of the Elk River Resource Recovery Project, Tim Steinbeck, all of licensed haulers bring at least a portion of their collected sol at the resource recovery plant in Elk River. Incineration of solid waste or Refuse-derived Fuel (RDF) at this plant is used to produce electric energy. IV. Costs and Benefits: Open (current) versus Organized Solid Waste Removal Systems Each system has pros and cons. Some reasons for consideration of a change from an open to an or system involve city-wide impacts like costs of repair to city roads, meeting increasingly stringent requirements for the removal of recycling materials from the solid waste stream, increasing compliance in reducing solid waste. Benefits to Switching to an Organized Waste Removal System: City at Large Costs: street damage is an important budgetary item for any city. Less road wear and tear would be beneficial because at present up to 5 or more (depending on level of service contra by resident) collection vehicles travel parts or all of the samerough a neighborhood any given day. Code enforcement- although City code and Minnesota law requires every household to have garbage service, the current system makes that extremely difficult to moyielding code enforcement issues. Organized collection would mean full participation and less illeProcessing of complaints about garbage burning, garbage hoarding or placement of residential gas, business dumpsters, raises costs for everyone. It creates a case load of inspections, letters and abatements for difficult cases. Many cases would be eliminated with organized collection automatically servicing all residents in units 1-12. All citizens get garbage hauled away on a weekly basis with organized system.- Public safetyconsiderably fewer heavy garbage trucks would enter and leave ci under organized collection. Less heavy truck traffic decreases the op dangerous interaction in the streets with pedestrians and bicyclists considering there are few sidewalks in the city. An Active Transportation Plan encouraging more walking and biking has been passed recently and the City will encourage more use of streets for this purpose(July 2013). Organized collection typically results in higher recycling rates and waste collection (although recycling is every two weeks and waste collection is every week),especially if pricing incentives exist for reducing waste volumes (e.g. lower rates for smaller carts). Air pollution may be improved through lower vehicle emissions Costs remain fixed or known for the period of the contract, and pricing is not dependent on property owners calling to find the best deals on a regular basis. There might be pricing advantages depending on the marketplace and level of current completion based on pric The City would be responding to the larger number of people who have indicated that they are in favor of the City shifting to this system (see history under EQEC in section II.). City billing and mailings could be used as a convenient method for public education. Garbage complaint can be more easily monitored for consistency in service Fuel consumption would be reduced for haulers A new organized collection could include organics-food waste composting instead of with an open system which could conceivably bring yet another round of trucks. Organized collection could provide consistency in the movement toward the waste from private homes. It could also remove yet another truck on the streets by consolidating the pickup of yard waste. Possible Disadvantages of Organized Collection of Solid Waste Customers currently have a choice of haulers and can shop around for the best pricing and option an organized system, the city negotiates on behalf of the service that is fixed for 5-8 years in put in place. Their hauler is chosen by zone market share. Their current company or favorite driver may be working in a different neighborhood. Residents who have recently switched haulers with special incent comparative rate with organized collection in the short term-depending on just how long the special pricing and contractual commitments last. There would be an increased City administrative burden associateng a new system, similar to the City Single Sort Recycling process (which went smoothly in 2012) The City would have to monitor and enforce the terms of the contract. The process itself can be contentious in a community with haulers, lobbyists and those residents who want to select their own hauler or who do not want government in-like service vocalizing their concerns. The waste industry is vigorously opposed to public collection, and is willing spend significant funds to take steps to prevent it. Currently hauling businesses can increase their market share and new haulers can apply for a license and come into the marketplace. Do Fridley residents pay more for trash pickup than residents of A lesser point in this report, but other cities like Falcon Heights have felt it is a significant one. The answer depends on several factors. The business profile of a hauler is altered by organized collection and includes some plus sides for their bottom line. Instead of the higher fuel costs involved with providing service to widely dispersed customers, through an organized collection system, each licensed firm provides service to every house in a certain section of the city based on demonstrably possess. Training in new drivers is simplified if collection is eliminated if the City contract includes billing through sewer andy with recycling charges. V. New State of Minnesota Solid Waste Organized Collection Legislat Procedures The Minnesota Legislature passed a new organized collection law, law (Chapter 45) was supported by the League of Minnesota Cites, Fridley is a member. The new legislation simplifies the process for adopting organized solid waste collection by eliminating the cumbersome 180-day process for adopting organized collection, and replacing it with a 60-day negotiation period between a city and its licensed collector The new process is designed to give the current collectors the first chance to deve organized collection. If the 60-day negotiation period ends without an agreement, a city can con process by adopting a resolution to form a committee to study ornized collection and make recommendations. Cities that have already organized collection a current organized collection methods continue to govern. Steps for organizing collection The steps for adopting organized solid waste collection under the 2013 Minnesota Statute are as follows: 1. Notice to public and licensed collectors. Before forming a committee to study organized collection, a city must notify the public and its licensed collectors that it is considering organizing collection. The new does not specify how notice should be provided. The League of Mi both published notice and individual mailed notice to each licen 2. Sixty-day negotiation period. After a city provides notice of its intent to consider organizin-day negotiation period that is exclusive between the city and its li reach an agreement during this period. The purpose of the negotiation period is t to develop a proposal in which they, as members of an organizati designated sections of the city. The proposal must addresses specific issues set out in the new law. decision to implement organized collection. Public notice, public hearing, and implementation: city must provide public notice and hold at least one public hearing before decidi 4. Committee formation. If a city does not reach an agreement with its licensed collectors during the formby resolution collection and issue a report. The City Council appoints the committee members, and the committee is subject to the Open Meeting Law. The Council may choose to use t committee must examine different methods of organizing collectio establish a list of criteria for evaluating the different methods of col cities and towns with organized collection; and seek input at a official responsible for solid waste issues, licensed solid waste and recycling collectors, and city residents. VI. Impact of Garbage Trucks on Our Roads Concern about wear and tear on City streets from the volume of r list of reasons why organized collection is adopted by cities. As an older first ring suburb, nearly all of Fridleystly process in which property owner assessment pays only a frac of the costs. The City of Fridley, along with other cities receives calls from who are trying to reduce truck traffic impact. These calls focus mainly on how to reduce road damage and how to minimize safety concerns. Presentation by James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, November 12, 2013 MEMORANDUM DATE: November 12, 2013 SUBJECT: Roadway Impacts from Refuse Collection Vehicles The City of Fridley has been awaiting the final production of a mode heavy vehicles to local roadways. The development of this tool Local Road Research Board project on the impact of refuse haulers on pavement performance by Dr. W. James Wilde of the Minnesota State University, Mankato. A final available. I have since been working with engineering staff to needed to provide the detailed results of impacts identified by the too ongoing as of today, and the analysis of our community using the Pending the final results from what will be a lengthy analysis, I believe it is prudent to prov Environmental Quality and Energy Commission with an estimate of based on other techniques. Therefore, we have performed an increis based on the presumption of moving from a refuse collection system of five ha This analysis provides a general estimate using information that use of the heavy vehicle model produced by the LRRB. This will continue to be worked on by staff, reported when completed. For additional information, please see a summary report published by Dr. Wilde on Assessing the Effects of Heavy Vehicles on Local Roadways. CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISIO ESTIMATE OF POTENTIAL REFUSE VEHICLE IMPACTS TO LOCAL ROADS IN T Date: 11/12/2013 The impacts of refuse hauling vehicles on roadways have been a mtter of much discussion in recent years. The complexity of this issue is due to the many assumptions and required to determine actual impacts to roadways, including pave traffic forecasting, and route projections. The goal of this report is to provide an order of magnitude in r The analysis uses the MnPAVE version 6.210 beta, which is a pave allows inputs of vehicle counts and truck data. The MnPAVE design tool is a computer program that combines known empirical relationships with a representation of pavement behavior. An analysis was performed using this software with the following 1. Existing truck traffic is 4% on local roadways. This is likely a high es accurate information on truck counts on all local road segments. produce conservative results in this analysis of hauler impacts. 2. All streets are built to local residential standards. Some base thickness. By assuming the standard pavement and base sect conservative results in this analysis of hauler impacts. 3. Five refuse trucks (tandem axle) travel on local road segmen 4. In the reduced traffic scenario, one refuse truck travels on 5. The range of weight for refuse trucks is assumed to be the same as for the existing case, as the truck begin their route empty, and end their route full. 6. Refuse trucks are assumed to be 3-axle tandems (MnPAVE type 3). 7. Existing traffic on local roads is assumed to have the follonges of Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT): Local Road AADT Scenario 1Scenario 2 0 500 25% 35% 500 1000 25% 40% 1000 + 50% 25% 8. Traffic and truck traffic are assumed to have a zero growth 9. Projections of terminal service life of pavement are as indi are not resurfaced until this projected terminal service life is Estimated terminal service life of existing standard pavement see performed using the MnPAVE software for AADTs of 500, 750, and 1000, respectively. The sam in four weekly trips for refuse hauling vehicles on a given stre results of this analysis. 20-year Terminal Service Scenario Traffic ears) 500A Existing standard distribution, 4% heavy vehicles 318,410 36 500B Reduced truck traffic by 4 refuse truck trips weekly 304,593 43 750A Existing standard distribution, 4% heavy vehicles 477,617 24 750B Reduced truck traffic by 4 refuse truck trips weekly 464,202 25 1000A Existing standard distribution, 4% heavy vehicles 636,810 18 1000B Reduced truck traffic by 4 refuse truck trips weekly 622,183 18 Note that the 20-year ESAL is a count of the load equivalency factor for an Equiv (estimated to have the impact of an 18,000 lb single axle load) - year period. The MnPAVE software creates a load spectrum for all types of vehicles and converts these to ESALs which are then used to calculate theoretical pavement deterioration. What is seen in the estimate is that as traffic increases on a l in reducing trips of the same number of heavy vehicles. This is as would be expected, as other t impacting the roadway creates a larger proportion of deteriorati vehicles less substantial. Any reduction in terminal service life is applied for each of the AADT projected for local roads from assumed traffic, and applied against the annual average cost of City of Fridley over the past 10 years ($1.377 million). Based on this set of calculations and modeling, the result would be an estimated cost range of between $81,000 and $117,000 annually. The numbers in this range average Levy. Note that there are refinements that could be made to more accur more detailed analysis of existing street segments. While the assumptions with this estimate are generally conservat timing of resurfacing, which may not always await the achievemenhe roadway due to other factors or deterioration. In addition, it quality of construction, drainage, and other factors that may le roadways would reduce any realized savings. Therefore, even if the prior assumptions and resulting impacts are assumed to be accurate, savings would be reduced fro November 2013 I hereby certify that this plan, specifications, or report was pirect supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer Minnesota. James P. Kosluchar, P.E. Registration No. 26460 Other information about roads and fewer vehicles At one time, in Bloomington, the city had a program to help neighborhoods organize collection on their own. In Falcon Heights, prior to their investigation of organize Court neighborhood negotiated as a group, with the common goal ower trucks on their alleys. Several informal efforts of this sort have taken place in Fridle, but contract termination penalties make this difficult for neighborhoods to organize if they are trying to reduce the quantity of trucks rolling through. In the last 10 years including 2004 and 2013: Capital improvements to F approximately $14.2 million (reclamation, milling, curbing, paving, and ADA upgrades), accord Assistant City Engineer, Layne Otteson. Maintenance to streets as another approximately $1.4 million to that figure in the form of curb replacement, striping, sealco compliance. Finding ways to reduce or delay street repair costs in the City is very important. So how can we quantify the impact of garbage trucks on our infrastructure? The simplest answer is: fewer garbage trucks on our streets will yield fewer impacts on Cityof Fridley residential roadways. Vehicle axle weight is the largest determining factor in pavement wear. Three-axle garbage trucks have an axle weight of approximately 20,000 pounds per front axle and the highest axle weight of any vehicle regularly found in residential neighborhoods. According to standard figures used to calculate the impacts of different kinds of vehicles on a typical passenger car has an Equivalent Single Axel Load (ESAL) factor o with 18,000 pounds per axle, which has a factor of 1.0, or the e29 cars. A garbage truck can be as high as 1.6 or 2286 cars; MnDOT uses a formula that says one garbage truck trip is equivalent to 1000 car trips. Falcon Heights, quoted a much more conservative ESAL factor of 0 axle garbage truck, or the equivalent of 857 cars, given by H.R. Green, City Engineer, at t Duane Schwartz, Public Works Director of Roseville calculated th the street 5 to 10 years, saving a typical homeowner $20 to $40 pe The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute studied and came to the conclusion that extra garbage trucks on our streets and alleys do have a significimpact. The Institute Garbage truck design may mitigate some of the impact on roadways. The relationship between truck weight and street damage appear related to the number of axles, the number of stops a truck makes and whether the truck is center loaded or rear loaded. Rear load on the rear axles, while center loaded trucks distribute the weight more evenly, reducing the impact of each axle According to one Michigan report (see Appendix), axle weight is still the main determining factor. Informal research from the City of Fridley Public Works department indicates the number of stops and starts at speed between widely spaced residences may have an even greater road surface impact than the number of trucks. How fast the truck is going when they stop is a key, also. That dovetails with the Roseville report stating that starting and stopping (especially stopping) will increase the damage to streets by 50% to 100% dep the weight In other words, the faster a truck is moving when it stops, the ss to the pavement. A truck with fewer, more widely spaced stops is moving faster betw The more garbage trucks that serve a street, the smaller the ave each truck makes and faster the average speed of each truck between stops. Therefore, although total number of stops remains the same, as the number of trucks damage from each stop. This points toward reducing the impact of heavy garbage trucks on our streets and alleys by reducing the number of trucks to one per area, with lower speeds because a single truck collect VII. Safety, Noise and Air Pollution in Our Neighborhoods Would fewer garbage trucks on our street affect our quality of life as well as our road infrastructure? Quality of life in a neighborhood includes safety, noise and air quality. Recent indicators about air pollution have proven to yield more adverse health impacts than previously thought. An organized collection contract with the city of Fridley could cleaner fuels like natural gas. Garbage trucks consume an average of 8,600 gallons of fuel per y more than any other kind of vehicle except tractor trailers and transit buse major source of air pollution, including particulate matter, gre a negative effect on respiratory health and quality of life. Several studies found that natural gas burning trucks produce significant reduct competition in the refuse industry, some haulers were motivated to use natural gas vehicles to give their organization a marketi Natural gas-burning trucks are showing up with several Twin Cities haulers. Diesel garbage trucks generate noise levels up to 100 decibels, that can cause hearing damage. VIII. Program Design for Future Organics Collection and Improving Recycling Any conversion from the current Open system to an Organized Collection system would include contract language designed to collect food waste and to improve recycling. As stated in the introductory secti this will help the City of Fridley comply with State and County IX. Conclusion and Staff Recommendations City-wide Impacts of Reduced Roadway Wear and Code Enforcement To date, a lot of the emphasis on the pros and cons of organized collection has been generated from input and at meetings by property owners concerned about safety and roadway impacts/condi Others have called the City about a lack of consistency in pricing of the solid waste hauling service costs to property owners even though this is part of private enterprise and the open hauling system. With that in mind some residents have said, keep the City out of private enterprise. Left out of most discussions is the significant costs to the City and therefore the taxpayers, of maintaining and constructing roadways. Road repair and reconditioning costs are only fractionally subsi to residents on the affected streets. The rest of the not insignificant costs are borne by taxpayers. Code enforcement Significant staff time is involved with code enforcement related Summary Staff is submitting this report for the EQEC using the framework of: Reducing financial impacts of roadway repair in order to increase the lifespan of residential roadways. Reducing staff time on code enforcement Improving air quality. Increasing neighborhood safety and walkability by reducing the number of garbage trucks on our streets. Safety concerns for parents who seldom allow young children to w would be somewhat dispelled also. In addition it allows Fridley to move solid waste reduction goals forward- related to factors like pulling organics (food waste) out of the waste stream. Advantageous pricing for reducing the size of garbage containers,type of fuel used in garbage vehicles and hours of operation. Organized collection would reduce exhaust fumes and noise pollution by scaling back the number of garbage trucks serving City neighborhoods. Educational opportunities to decrease solid waste and to increas recycling would be streamlined. Staff sought information from other cities and their staff members that have considered organized collection or cities that are currently organized (like Maplewood) and reviewed published information on organized collection. According to staff and elected officials from cities like Maplew gone through this process, negative feedback from individuals opposed to organized solid waste collection has been temporary. Residents may or may not find cost-savings with an organized system, if viewed only through the lens of a bill they pay at home. But we are asking for a more city-wide review of impacts of the current system, not least of which is the tax burden of street re-construction. Next Steps After review of this information, if it is the consensus of the at the interests of the City are best served by instituting a program of organized collection in the City, a recommendation would then be sent to the Fridley City Council. A designated representative of the EQEC would present this recommendation at the appropriate City Council meeting, as a request to commence the process of organized collection using the new procedures from the State of Minnesota (http://www.leg.state.mn.us/docs/2013/other/130945.pdf, page 28). Conversely, the EQEC may state that it has reviewed the topic and that it does not recommend pursuing organized collection at this time. If the Fridley City Council receives a positive recommendation f and f the decision of the Fridley City Council is to proceed with the organized solid waste collection proposal solicitation, staff will follow Minnesota Statute HF128/SF510/Chapter 45, which includes a sixty-day countdown to receive a currently licensed garbage haulers, as below: 1.Ace Solid Waste, Inc. 2.Allied Waste/Republic Services 3.LePage & Sons 4.Walters Recycling and Refuse 5.Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc. X. Appendix and Additional Reading 1). State of Minnesota Organized Collection Law 2013 2013 Minnesota Statutes Resources 115A.94 ORGANIZED COLLECTION. Definition. Subdivision 1. "Organized collection" means a system for collecting solid waste in which a specified collector, or a member of an organization of collectors, is authorized to collect from a defined geographic service area or areas some or all of the solid waste that is released by generators for collection. Local authority. Subd. 2. A city or town may organize collection, after public notification and hearing as required in subdivisions 4a to 4d. A county may organize collection as provided in subdivision 5. A city or town that has organized collection as of May 1, 2013, is exempt from subdivisions 4a to 4d. General provisions. Subd. 3. (a) The local government unit may organize collection as a municipal service or by ordinance, franchise, license, negotiated or bidded contract, or other means, using one or more collectors or an organization of collectors. (b) The local government unit may not establish or administer organized collection in a manner that impairs the preservation and development of recycling and markets for recyclable materials. The local government unit shall exempt recyclable materials from organized collection upon a showing by the generator or collector that the materials are or will be separated from mixed municipal solid waste by the generator, separately collected, and delivered for reuse in their original form or for use in a manufacturing process. (c) The local government unit shall invite and employ the assistance of interested persons, including persons licensed to operate solid waste collection services in the local government unit, in developing plans and proposals for organized collection and in establishing the organized collection system. (d) Organized collection accomplished by contract or as a municipal service may include a requirement that all or any portion of the solid waste, except (1) recyclable materials and (2) materials that are processed at a resource recovery facility at the capacity in operation at the time that the requirement is imposed, be delivered to a waste facility identified by the local government unit. In a district or county where a resource recovery facility has been designated by ordinance under section 115A.86, organized collection must conform to the requirements of the designation ordinance. Subd. 4. [Repealed, 2013 c 45 s 7] Committee establishment. Subd. 4a. (a) Before implementing an ordinance, franchise, license, contract, or other means of organizing collection, a city or town, by resolution of the governing body, must establish an organized collection options committee to identify, examine, and evaluate various methods of organized collection. The governing body shall appoint the committee members. (b) The organized collection options committee is subject to chapter 13D. Committee duties. Subd. 4b. The committee established under subdivision 4a shall: (1) determine which methods of organized collection to examine, which must include: (i) a system in which a single collector collects solid waste from all sections of a city or town; and (ii) a system in which multiple collectors, either singly or as members of an organization of collectors, collect solid waste from different sections of a city or town; (2) establish a list of criteria on which the organized collection methods selected for examination will be evaluated, which may include: costs to residential subscribers, miles driven by collection vehicles on city streets and alleys, initial and operating costs to the city of implementing the organized collection system, providing incentives for waste reduction, impacts on solid waste collectors, and other physical, economic, fiscal, social, environmental, and aesthetic impacts; (3) collect information regarding the operation and efficacy of existing methods of organized collection in other cities and towns; (4) seek input from, at a minimum: (i) the governing body of the city or town; (ii) the local official of the city or town responsible for solid waste issues; (iii) persons currently licensed to operate solid waste collection and recycling services in the city or town; and (iv) residents of the city or town who currently pay for residential solid waste collection services; and (5) issue a report on the committee's research, findings, and any recommendations to the governing body of the city or town. Governing body; implementation. Subd. 4c. The governing body of the city or town shall consider the report and recommendations of the organized collection options committee. The governing body must provide public notice and hold at least one public hearing before deciding whether to implement organized collection. Organized collection may begin no sooner than six months after the effective date of the decision of the governing body of the city or town to implement organized collection. Participating collectors proposal requirement. Subd. 4d. Prior to establishing a committee under subdivision 4a to consider organizing residential solid waste collection, a city or town with more than one licensed collector must notify the public and all licensed collectors in the community. The city or town must provide a 60-day period in which meetings and negotiations shall occur exclusively between licensed collectors and the city or town to develop a proposal in which interested licensed collectors, as members of an organization of collectors, collect solid waste from designated sections of the city or town. The proposal shall include identified city or town priorities, including issues related to zone creation, traffic, safety, environmental performance, service provided, and price, and shall reflect existing haulers maintaining their respective market share of business as determined by each hauler's average customer count during the six months prior to the commencement of the 60-day negotiation period. If an existing hauler opts to be excluded from the proposal, the city may allocate their customers proportionally based on market share to the participating collectors who choose to negotiate. The initial organized collection agreement executed under this subdivision must be for a period of three to seven years. Upon execution of an agreement between the participating licensed collectors and city or town, the city or town shall establish organized collection through appropriate local controls and is not required to fulfill the requirements of subdivisions 4a, 4b, and 4c, except that the governing body must provide the public notification and hearing required under subdivision 4c. County organized collection. Subd. 5. (a) A county may by ordinance require cities and towns within the county to organize collection. Organized collection ordinances of counties may: (1) require cities and towns to require the separation and separate collection of recyclable materials; (2) specify the material to be separated; and (3) require cities and towns to meet any performance standards for source separation that are contained in the county solid waste plan. (b) A county may itself organize collection under subdivisions 4a to 4d in any city or town that does not comply with a county organized collection ordinance adopted under this subdivision, and the county may implement, as part of its organized collection, the source separation program and performance standards required by its organized collection ordinance. Organized collection not required or prevented. Subd. 6. (a) The authority granted in this section to organize solid waste collection is optional and is in addition to authority to govern solid waste collection granted by other law. (b) Except as provided in subdivision 5, a city, town, or county is not: (1) required to organize collection; or (2) prevented from organizing collection of solid waste or recyclable material. (c) Except as provided in subdivision 5, a city, town, or county may exercise any authority granted by any other law, including a home rule charter, to govern collection of solid waste. Anticompetitive conduct. Subd. 7. (a) A political subdivision that organizes collection under this section is authorized to engage in anticompetitive conduct to the extent necessary to plan and implement its chosen organized collection system and is immune from liability under state laws relating to antitrust, restraint of trade, unfair trade practices, and other regulation of trade or commerce. (b) An organization of solid waste collectors, an individual collector, and their officers, members, employees, and agents who cooperate with a political subdivision that organizes collection under this section are authorized to engage in anticompetitive conduct to the extent necessary to plan and implement the organized collection system, provided that the political subdivision actively supervises the participation of each entity. An organization, entity, or person covered by this paragraph is immune from liability under state law relating to antitrust, restraint of trade, unfair trade practices, and other regulation of trade or commerce. 2) State of Minnesota Waste Management Act 115A.02 LEGISLATIVE DECLARATION OF POLICY; PURPOSES. (a) It is the goal of this chapter to protect the state's land, air, water, and other natural resources and the public health by improving waste management in the state to serve the following purposes: (1) reduction in the amount and toxicity of waste generated; (2) separation and recovery of materials and energy from waste; (3) reduction in indiscriminate dependence on disposal of waste; (4) coordination of solid waste management among political subdivisions; and (5) orderly and deliberate development and financial security of waste facilities including disposal facilities. (b) The waste management goal of the state is to foster an integrated waste management system in a manner appropriate to the characteristics of the waste stream and thereby protect the state's land, air, water, and other natural resources and the public health. The following waste management practices are in order of preference: (1) waste reduction and reuse; (2) waste recycling; (3) composting of source-separated compostable materials, including but not limited to, yard waste and food waste; (4) resource recovery through mixed municipal solid waste composting or incineration; (5) land disposal which produces no measurable methane gas or which involves the retrieval of methane gas as a fuel for the production of energy to be used on site or for sale; and (6) land disposal which produces measurable methane and which does not involve the retrieval of methane gas as a fuel for the production of energy to be used on site or for sale. 3) City of Fridley Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Orga 2010-2011 Sample Survey (note procedures described in this survey are no longer applicab of a change in Minnesota Statute as above): Dear Ms Dahl: Fridley's Environmental Quality and Energy Commission (EQEC) hasgarbage collection systems. At their January meeting, they agreed to continue the sey would ask a random sample of Fridley residents for their opinion The selection of potential survey respondents was made through random selec the persons selected through this process. Now that you have bee introduction and answering the question below. The results of the survey will be in a future City newsletter article. Once you have completed the survey, we ask that you mail your reou wish to avoid the cost of postage, you may phone in your survey response to th 572-3500. Alternatively, you may email your response along with your Background - At an October, 2009 City Council meeting, a Fridley resident com using City streets and asked that the City consider going to an competitive bidding process, identifies one hauler to serve the whole City. Thi currently hires one recycling hauler to pick up recycled items tn" hauling system where each household selects its own garbage hauler. In response to this person and to others who raised this issue ied a December, 2009 newsletter article which asked people to report teelings to Mayor Scott Lund. It also took the issue to the EQEC which agreed to study the two types of garbage collection s hauling at five meetings in 2010. At their April meeting, they hheurle, a Planning Director from the Minnesota Pollution Control Administration (MPCA) provide an overview of tity Attorney, Fritz Knaak assess state and local law as it relates ttion. In July, they heard a panel of representatives from Blaine, Columbia Heights, and Robbinsdale tell how organize heard two speakers discuss the environmental aspects of garbage tems. Finally, in November, the EQEC invited Fridley's haulers to share their points of view on organized vs. Generally, those speaking in favor of organized collection at this selected through a competitive bidding process every few years w resident negotiates separately with multiple haulers. Proponentss rather than multiple haulers will save wear and tear on City strCity's neighborhoods. The haulers appear to have somewhat different points-of-view depending upon whether they are local or national haulers. The local haulers are more fiercely protective of their right to do developing their customer base and that this base should not be tion among multiple haulers generates better service than a system where th organized collection systems cost residents less, they argue thah organized and open collection systems makes price comparison difficult. Wh produce less carbon dioxide emissions than open collection systetally friendly improvements to their garbage trucks. They also argue tts is largely anecdotal; moreover, they say factors such a street dnificant determinants of street wear and tear. Now that you've read this brief background on "organized" vs. "ion. Based on what you know, should the Fridley City Council implemen"organized" collection system whereby it selects one garbage hauler to serve all of Fridley th _____ Yes _____ No Thank you very much for providing your response on this very imp 4) Other Information and Resources Report from Ramsey County, Minnesota http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/NR/rdonlyres/909B52B9-D2FE-42E4-A9E4- 4EC6F91B11E8/5510/PC_Traffic_Issues.pdf Twin Assistance by GBB Solid Waste Management Consultants, September, Resource Recovery Project, 2002. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection 12 October 13, 2004 Research Institute, August 1992, p. ix. ille, May, 2002 http://www.ci.roseville.mn.us/info/waste/report.pdf Recovery Project, 2002, appendix 2E. http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/recovery/docs/2E.pdf 2003 Solid Waste Policy Report to the Minnesota Legislature, pre Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA), January, 2004. Executi p. 1. http://www.moea.state.mn.us/publications/policy2003-summary.pdf -Reid Associates, February, 1988, p. 27. Dr. Wilde, Minnesota State University, Mankato. Assessing the Effects of Heavy Vehicles on Local Roadways.