HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-03-21; City Council; 9932; Recycling Pilot Project Contract Coast WasteCIFr- OF CARLSBAD - AGENC' BILL
ATG. 3/21/89 RECYCLING PILOT PROJECT CONTRACT >EPT.- WITH COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT,
~
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 89-90 authorizing the Mayor to execute a Contract with Coast Waste Management, Incorporated for the operation of a pilot curbside recycling project in the City of
Carlsbad, and appropriating additional funds for the purchase of household containers.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On February 7, 1989, the City Council approved a voluntary recycling pilot project involving 500 single family residences in downtown (south of Elm Ave/ east of Monroe St/ north of Chestnut Ave/ and west of El Camino Real), and 500 single family
residences in La Costa (south of La Costa Ave/ north of Levante St).
Additionally, City Council directed staff to prepare, for
Council consideration, a contract to perform the recycling pilot
project with Coast Waste Management, Incorporated.
The attached contract provides for the curbside collection of recyclables (aluminum, glass, paper, and plastic) beginning the
first week of May, 1989. The project will be run at no cost to the City, with the exception of the individual household containers. The City shall purchase these containers. The City will apply for California Department of Conservation and County
of San Diego grant funds to offset the cost of these containers.
The contract provides for a comprehensive collection of empirical data, cumulating in an extensive 6-month report due
to the City from Coast Waste Management no later than November
15, 1989. Assuming that the results of the pilot project indicate that a successful and cost-effective City-wide curbside recycling program is possible, it is the staff's intent to discuss and negotiate with Coast Waste Management for a City-
wide curbside program, the contract to be presented to the
Council for consideration in early 1990. Should the development of a City-wide program be delayed for any reason, the contract provides for an extension of the pilot project for up to six additional months. This will ensure that the continuity and momentum of the pilot project is maintained.
The contract presents the pilot project as part of an overall recycling effort, and encourages the expansion of other recycling efforts such as drop-off centers, industrial and commercial recycling, and charitable group donations.
PAGE 2 OF AB#4932
FISCAL IMPACT:
The entire cost of the pilot project, with the exception of
individual household containers, shall be borne by Coast Waste Management. The City will purchase 1100 sets of two (2) household containers, at a cost of between $9.20 and $12.50 per set, for a total cost of between $10,120 and $13,750. Staff is preparing proposals to apply for grants from the California Dept. of Conservation and the County of San Diego to offset this expense. The next grant cycle for both these organizations begin in March 1989, with grant funds distributed before the end of FY 1988-89. Since the purchase of the containers needs to be completed before the middle of April, an appropriation of
$13,750 from the unappropriated fund balance is needed. Should grant funds be received as expected, the unappropriated fund will be reimbursed.
EXHIBITS :
1) Resolution No. 37-90 authorizing the Mayor to execute the pilot curbside recycling project contract.
2) Pilot Curbside Recycling Project Contract.
3) Memorandum to City Manager from Utilities/Maintenance
Director dtd 3/7/89
4) Memorandum to Assistant City Manager from Utilities/
Maintenance Director dtd 3/8/89
-.
E
7
€
9
1c
11
1%
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 89-90
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A PILOT CURBSIDE
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF INDIVIDUAL RECYCLING CONTRACT WITH COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INCORPORATED,
HOUSEHOLD RECYCLING CONTAINERS
WHEREAS, on February 7, 1989, the City Council approved
a voluntary pilot curbside recycling program for the City of
Carlsbad; and
WHEREAS, City Council directed staff to prepare a
contract to perform this pilot recycling project with Coast
Waste Management, Incorporated; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad and Coast Waste Management,
Incorporated desire to enter into a contract for the operation
of a pilot curbside recycling project; and
WHEREAS, the purchase of 1100 sets of individual
household containers by the City is necessary to launch the
xrbside recycling pilot project; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad is applying for recycling
grant funds from the California Department of Conservation and
the County of San Diego; and
WHEREAS, grant funds will not be available before the
9urchase of the individual household containers is made; and
WHEREAS, the appropriation of funds is necessary to
?urchase the individual household containers.
/I/
//I
/I/
/I/
//I
t
t
I
1(
13
1:
1:
14
1[
1t
17
I€
1s
2c
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
!ity of Carlsbad, California that:
1) That the above citations are true and correct.
2) That the Mayor is authorized to execute on behalf of
:he City Council the pilot curbside recycling project contract.
3) That the amount of $13,750 is hereby appropriated from
:he General Fund Unappropriated Fund Balance to the Utilities
md Maintenance Department Special Departmental Supplies Account
001-60-10-2660) .
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
March, 1989 by the larlsbad City Council held on the 2g day of
'ollowing vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux and Larson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Lewis
/n
L aWIS, Mayor
ANN J. KULCHIN, Mayor Pro-Tem
TTEST:
;* Clerk
I
SEAL)
1
PILOT CURBSIDE RECYCLING CONTRACT
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this day of L
198 -7 by and between the CITY OF CARLSBAD, California, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", and Coast Waste Management,
Incorporated, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City does find that the proposal tendered by the Contractor
for operating a pilot curbside recycling program, including the furnishing of
all labor, services, materials and equipment at no cost to the City with the
exception of individual household containers, was a responsible proposal and of
high standards;
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad does further find and determine that it would
be in the best interests of the City that said proposal be accepted and the
contract be awarded to the Contractor;
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises
of the parties hereto and upon the express terms and conditions hereinafter set
forth, it is agreed by and between them, and each with the other, as follows:
1. CONTRACTORS OBLIGATIONS
A. The Contractor agrees to furnish all tools, equipment, apparatus,
facilities, labor, services and materials, with the exception of household
containers, and perform all work necessary to operate in good and workerlike manner,
all facets of a pilot curbside recycling project according to the proposal submitted
and accepted and as delineated in this Contract. It is understood and agreed
that all said labor, services, materials, and equipment shall be furnished and
said work performed and completed by the Contractor as an indepvdent Contractor,
subject to the inspection and approval of the City acting through its Utilities
I
2
andMaintenance Director ordesignated representative. The Contractor shall assume
all risks for loss of or damage to tools or equipment owned/rented by the
Contractor.
B. Contractor agrees to provide weekly collection of recyclable materials,
specifically aluminum, glass, paper and plastic from the residences designated
in Exhibit A of this document.
C. The Contractor shall furnish said labor, services, materials and
equipment as set forth in this Contract, except for the provision of individual
household collection containers, at no cost to the City or to the citizens of
the City.
D. Contractor agrees to conduct a promotion campaign prior to the first
curbside collection. This promotion will be sufficient to expose all households
in the pilot project area to information about the recycling program.
E. Contractor agrees to accurately record collection data sufficient
to comply with the reporting requirements delineated in Exhibit B.
F. Contractor shall distribute two containers to each participating
household at least seven (7) days prior to the first collection.
G. Contractor shall develop neighborhood drop-off collection centers,
in accordance with the Contractors proposal (Exhibit C) .
H. Contractor shall conduct on-going promotion of the pilot project,
as well as efforts to expand commercial and industrial recycling.
I. Contractor shall begin the curbside collection of recyclables during
the week of May 1, 1989, and shall make weekly collections until the termination
of the contract as outlined in Paragraph 16 of this Contract.
6
3
2. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS
A. The City agrees to provide to the Contractor 1100 sets of two (2)
stackable residential recycling containers ten (10) working days prior to the
commencement of the first collection. The entire cost of the household containers
will be borne by the City. The individual household containers shall remain property
of the City.
B. The City shall provide sufficient household containers to supply
each household within the pilot project areas with two (2) plastic stackable
containers. The replacement of damaged, lost or stolen containers shall be
coordinated by the Utilities and Maintenance Department.
C. The Utilities and Maintenance Director or his designated representative
shall monitor the Contract service and act as City liaison to the Contractor.
3. WORKERLIKE PERFORMANCE
Contractor's employees shall be required to be clean and neat in appearance
and wear identification. Contractor will be required to submit verification that
employees have the right to work in the United States. Contractor shall perform
all obligations in a good professional and lawful manner, provide competent and
sober personnel, efficient and clean equipment, and service the City in courteous,
helpful and impartial manner. The Contractor shall remove any of its employees
for justifiable cause upon the request of the city.
4. FREOUENCY OF COLLECTION
Contractor shall coll ect recycl ab1 es once per week from each resident i a1
unit designated in Exhibit A of this Contract. Pilot homes will have recyclables
collected on the same day as their regular refuse is collected.
&
4
5. HOURS OF COLLECTION
Contractor shall make collection of recyclables between the hours of
7:OO A.M. and dark.
6. HOLIDAYS
The following listed holidays are designated for the purposes of this
contract :
New Year's Day Labor Day Memorial Day
Than ksgi vi ng Independence Day Christmas Day
Customers scheduled for collection on a hol iday shall be serviced on
the following workday.
7. INDEMNITY
The Contractor shall assume the defense of, pay all expenses of defense,
and indemnify and hol'd harmless the City, and its agents, officers and employees,
from all claims, loss, damage, injury and liability of every kind, nature and
description, directly or indirectly arising from or in connection with the
performance of this Contract or work; or from any failure or alleged failure of
the Contractor to comply with any applicable law, rules or regulations including
those relating to safety and health; except for loss or damage which was caused
solely by the active negligence of the City; and from any and all claims, loss,
damage, injury and liability, howsoever the same may be caused, resulting directly
or indirectly from the nature of the work covered by this Contract, unless the
loss or damage was caused solely by the active negligence of the City. The expenses
of defense include all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees for litigation,
arbitration, or other dispute resolution method.
.
5
8. INSURANCE
A. Without limiting the Contractor's indemnification, it is agreed
that the Contractor shall maintain in force at all times during the performance
of this Contract, a policy or policies of liability insurance in an amount of
at least $1,000,000 combined single 1 imit covering its operations, including coverage
for contractual liability, and all other liabilities set-forth herein.
6. Contractor's liability insurance policies shall contain the following
cl auses :
1. "The City of Carlsbad is added as an additional insured as respects
operations of the named insured performed under contract with
the City."
"It is agreed that any insurance maintained by the C
apply in excess of and not contribute with, insurance
by this policy."
2. ty shall
provided
All insurance policies required by this paragraph shall contain the
fol1 owing cl auses:
1. "This insurance shall not be cancelled, 1 imited or non-renewed
until after thirty (30) days written notice has been given to
the City."
"The insurer waives any rights of subrogation it has or may
have, against the City or any of its officers or employees."
Certificates of insurance evidencing the coverages required by the
clauses set forth above shall be filed with the City Clerk and the Risk Manager
prior to the effective date of this Contract.
2.
C. The Contractor will provide the City with a Blat&et Fidelity Bond
in the amount of at least $500,000 covering all employees of the Contractor.
6
9. IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT
The bntractor shall be aware of and comply with all Federal, State,
County and City Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations, including Workers' Compensation
laws (Division 4, California Labor Code) and the "Immigration Reform and Control a
Act of 1986" (SUSC, Sections 1101 through 1525), to include but not limited to,
verifying the eligibility for employment of all agents, employees, subcontractors
and consultants that are included in this Contract.
10. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
This Contract is subject to all City's ordinances and resolutions,
both present and future, to the extent that they regulate -1 the subject matter of
this Contract, said ordinances and resolutions shall bind the parties hereto and
shall bind each of the parties hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein.
11. REPORTING REOUIREMENTS
A. The Contractor will furnish comprehensive reports to the Utilities
and Maintenance Director as delineated in Exhibit B.
B. During the lst, 3rd and 5th months of the project, participation
of each individual household will be monitored, and data recorded on the bi-
monthly recycling report submitted to the Uti1 ities and Maintenance Director.
C. Every month, a lbs/ton count of recyclables collected in the pilot
project, by type, will be recorded for each of the two pilot project areas. This
information will be submitted to the Utilities and Maintenance Director on the
reports presented in Exhibit B.
D. Separate financial records of all costs and revenues associated
with the pilot project will be kept, and subject to the inspection by the City
6 at any time during normal work hours.
7
E. All reports required by Exhibit B will be submitted to the Utilities
and Maintenance Director on or before the date specified.
12. COLLECTION EOUIPMENT
The Contractor shall provide an adequate number of vehicles and equipment
for collection, processing and marketing in order to adequately operate the pilot
project. Truck bodies will be all metal and watertight. The Contractor shall
paint its name and phone number on the sides of each truck used in recycling
collection. Trucks shall be cleaned and washed at least once a week and will
be maintained in a clean, sanitary condition at all times.
13. BOOKS AND RECORDS
Collector shall keep true and accurate books and accounts of all business
done, money received, accounts payable and cash disbursements by reason of its
obligations hereunder. Said books and accounts shall be kept separate from any
books or accounts for services and Contractor’s business operations performed
outside the scope of this Contact. Said books and records and accounts shall
be open to inspection and audit by the City at all times.
14. ASSIGNMENT
Contractor shall not assign or sub-contract any of the duties under
this Contract without first obtaining approval from the Uti1 ities and Maintenance
Di rector.
15. INSPECTIONS
All performance, which includes services, materials, supplies and
equipment furnished or utilized in the performance of this Contract, and workmanship
in the performance of services shall be subject to inspection and approval by
the City at all times during the term of this Contract. Thwontractor shall
cooperate with any Inspector assigned by the City to permit the Inspector to
8
determine the Contractor's conformity with these specifications and the adequacy
of the services-being contractually provided. All inspection by the City shall
be made in such a manner as not to unduly interfere with Contractor performance.
16. TERM
This Contract shall remain in effect for a period of nine (9) months.
The term of the Contract may be extended for two (2) additional three (3) month
periods, at the option of the City.
17. REVIEW
The Utilities and Maintenance Director and other concerned City
personnel , as appropriate, will meet periodically to review the Contractor's
performance. The Contractor will be appraised how the City views the Contractor's
performance and the Contractor will appraise the City of problems, if any, being
experienced. The Contractor will also notify the Uti1 ities & Maintenance Director
in writing of any work being performed, if any, that the Contractor considers
to be over and above the requirements of this Contract. Appropriate action shall
be taken to resolve outstanding issues.
18. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR PROVISION
It is expressly understood and agreed that the Contractor named herein
for the furnishing of all labor, service, materials, and equipment performing
the work as provided in this Contract, is acting as an independent Contractor
and not as an agent, servant, or employee of the City.
19. CLAIMS AND LAWSUITS
The Contractor shall comply with the Government Tort Claims Act
(California Government Code, Section 900 et seq.) prior to filing any lawsuit
for breach of this Contract or any claim or cause of action forgoney or damages.
9
20. PROVISIONS REOUIRED BY LAW DEEMED INSERTED
Eachand every provision of 1 aw and clause required by 1 aw to be inserted
in this Contract shall be deemed to be inserted herein and included herein, and
if, through mistake or otherwise, any such provision is not inserted, or is not
correctly inserted, then upon application of either party, this Contract shall
forthwith by physically amended to make such insertion or correction.
21. DEFAULT BY CONTRACTOR
In the event Contractor fails for any reason whatsoever to perform
his obligations hereunder ten (10) days after written notice from City of any
default, City may, at its sole option terminate this contract.
22. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS ATTACHED
Additional provisions of this Contract are set forth in the attached
Exhibits A, B, and C, and made a part hereof.
23. INTENT OF PILOT PROJECT
It is the intent of this pilot curbside recycling project to assist
in the development of a comprehensive recycling program within the City of Carlsbad.
Thi s project shall complement, not rep1 ace or interfere with, other recycl i ng
efforts, such as charitable group donations, industrial and commercial recycling,
or buyback and drop-off centers.
24. AMENDMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS
This Contract may be amended or modified only by written Contract
signed by both parties, and failure on the part of either party to enforce any
provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of the right to
compel enforcement of such provision or provisions.
10
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract in the
day and year first above written.
CONTRACTOR CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal
corporation of the State of California
Title Claude A. Lewis, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ
City Clerk
(CORPORATE SEAL) (NOTARIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF EXECUTION MUST BE ATTACHED)
. .. -_
PILOT PROJECT
EL!? CHEST’: UT ARZ A
EXHIBIT A PAGE 1
RECYCLING ROUTE DOWNTOWN CARLSBAD
- TUESDAY 508 HOMES
All materials will be picked on right side of street.
Route starts at the corner of Celinda Dr. and Chestnut
Right on Celinda Drive 18 Homes
Right on Dana Court 0 Turnaround
Right on Celinda Drive 0
Right on Shawn Court 8 Turnaround
Right on Celinda Drive 5
Right on Kimberly Court 9
Turnaround
Right on Celinda Drive 4
turnaround Elm and Celinda
service right side Celinda 37
Right on Sara Way
Turnaround
11
Right on Maria Lane 12
Turnaround
Right on Sara Way 0
Right on Celinda Drive 2
Right on Cheetnut 0
Right on Donna Drive 15
Right on Janis Way 0
Right on Avondale Circle 8
Turnaround
Right on Janis Way 0
EXHIBIT A PAGE 2
I-
Right on Bedford Circle
Turnaround
Right on Janis Way
Turnaround
Right on Donna Drive
-
Right on Basswood
Right on Seacrest Drive
Right on Charter Oak
Left on Ridgecrest
Right on Camdem Circle
Turnaround
Right on Ridgecrest
Right on Meadow Lark Lane Turnaround
Left on Ridgecreast
Right on Seacrest Drive
Right on Hillcrest Circle
Turnaround
Right on Seacrest Drive
turnaround at Charter Oak
Seacrest Drive
Right on Ridgecrest
Right on Charter Oak
Left on Seacrest
Left on Basswood
Right on Donna Drive
Right on Falcon Drive turnaround
Right on Donna Drive
8
18
21
3
10
10
15
3
9
7
16
2
4
2
7
0
0
2
10
6
EXHIBIT A PAGE 3
. ..
Right on Nobhill Drive turnaround
Left on Donna Drive
x Falcom-
x Basswood
x Gayle Way
x Janis Way
Right on Lee Court Turnaround
Right on Donna Drive
Right on Charleen Turnaround
Right on Donna Drive
Right on Chestnut
Right on Monroe
Right on Gayle Way
Right on Ann Drive
Left on Janis Way
turnaround at Donna
Right on Laurie Circle turnaround
Right on Ann Drive
Right on Gayle Way
turnaround at Donna
Right on Monroe
Right on Linda Lane Turnaround
Right on Monroe
Right on Basswood
16
26
18
2
9
4
2
10
1
18
0
4
EXHIBIT A PAGE 4
Right on Belle Lane
turnaround
Right on Baeewood
turnaround at Donna Drive
and Basswood
Right on Monroe
Right on Westwood Drive turnaround
Right on Blenkarne Drive
turnaround at Westwood
Right on Truesdell Lane
Turnaround
Right on Blenkarne Drive
Right on Weetwood
6
14
0
31
0
9
28
FINISH ROUTE AT MONROE & WESTWOOD
6
EXHIBIT A PAGE 5
PILOT PROJECT
AREA 2
-.
I
LA COSTA AREA
C.. c .' A- /
EXHIBIT A PAGE 6
.
CARLSBAD CURBSIDE PILOT
LA COSTA, FRIDAY ROUTE
517 HOMES
44 Route starts at La Costa Boulevard Marbella Apratments. Leave yard left on El Camino Real
Left on La Costa Blvd
Right on Marbella Apartments
finish loop right on La Costa Blvd
Right on Nueva Castilla
Right on Lavante
Right on Sacada Circle
Right on Badajoz Place Turnaround
Right on Sacada Circle
Turnaround at Lavante
Sacada Circle
Right on Lavante
Right on Oviedo Place
Turnaround
Right on Lavante
x Sacada Circle
x Torrejon Place
Lavante
Right on Bargos Court Turnaround
Right on Lavante
Right on Reposa Drive
Left on Subida Terrace
Left on Rostico Drive
58
0
2
6
14
16
22
3
5
2
3
10
0
12
14
9
Q
EXHIBIT A PAGE 7
.-
Left on Eecenico Terrace
Turaround at Lavante
Right on Roetico Drive
Right on Saliente Way
Turnaround at Reposado Drive
Saliente Way
Right on Ruetico Drive
Right on Subida Terrace
Right on Repoeado Drive
Right on Pintoreeco Court Turnaround
Right on Reposado Drive
Right on Lavante
Right on Ladera Court
Turnaround
Right on Lavante
Right on Cima Court
Turnaround
Right on Lavante
Right on Cumbre Court Turnaround
Left on Lavante
(Falda Omitted from study)
Right on Eecenico Terrace
Right on Palacio Drive
Right on Palacio Court Turnaround
Right on Palacio Drive
Right on Vuelita Court
Turnaround
Right on Palacio Drive
7
0
0
13
0
0
1
27
0
0
14
0
14
0
14
0
2
14
3
Q
EXHIBIT A PAGE 8
Left on Anillg Way
Left on Palenque Street
Right on Marca Place
Turnaround
Right on Palenque Street
Right on Bolo Place
Turnaround
Right on Roc0 Street
Turnaround at Anillo Way
Roc0 Street
Right on Botella Place Turnaround
Right on Roc0 Street
Right on Plaauela Street
Left on Quitasol Street
Left on Boca Street
Turnaround at Palenque
Boca Street
Right on Pendon Court Turnaround
Right on Boca Street
Right on Quitaeol Street
Right on Plazuela Street
Right on Palenque Street
Right on Anillo Way
Right on Palacio Drive
Right on Recodo Court Turnaround
Right on Palacio Drive Turnaround
0
0
14
7
5
10
8
4
8
13
9
6
3
7
0
6
6
7
0
2
15
Q
16
EXHIBIT A PAGE 9
Right on Escenico Terrace 1
63 ---- ---- Right on Lavante
END AT LAVANTE AND NUEVA CASTILU 517
EXHIBIT A PAGE 10
. --
CARLSBAD RECYCLING PILOT PROJECT
BI-MONTHLY REPORT
-
REPORT DUE TO U & M DEPT- JUNE 15, AUG 15, AND OCT 15, I989
SECTION I: COLLECTION DATA
a.
b.
d.
d. e.
f.
g-
C.
C.
h.
i.
NUMBER OF HOMES IN SURVEY
# OF HOUSEHOLDS SET-OUT WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
MONTHLY TOTAL
SET-OUT RATE^
# OF HOUSEHOLDS PARTICIPATING AT LEAST ONCE DURING MONTH
PARTICIPATION RATE^
PARTI c IPATION : SET-OUT RAT 103
NOTE: AREA 1 - LA COSTA AREA
AREA 2 - ELM, CElESsT#uT AREA
MONTHLY T OTAL SET-OUT (LINE el. TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS IN AREA X 4
# OF HOMES PARTICIPATING (LINE ul TOTAL # OF HOMES IN PILOT PROJECT
2
&
PARTICIPATION RATE (L INE h) SET-OUT RATE (LINE f)
EXHIBIT B BI-MONTHLY REPORT PAGE 1
jm k.
1.
n.
P-
4-
r.
m.
0.
COLLECTION DATA
LBS ALUMINUM COLLECTED LBS GLASS COLLECTED LBS NEWSPAPER COLLECTED LBS PLASTIC COLLECTED LBS OTHER COLLECTED TO"= LBS COLLECTED
EFFICIENCY RATE4
RECOVERY RATE5
TONS RECYCLABLE MATERIALS RECOVERED (LINE I)) 4
TONS TOTAL RECYCLABLES IN PARTICIPATING HOUSEHOLDS
Q
PARTICIPATION RATE (LINE i) x EFFICIENCY RATE (LINE 9)
EXHIBIT B BI-MONTHLY REPORT PAGE 2
SECTION 11: BALANCE SHEET
MONTHLY EXPENSES:
-
COST FOR
MONTH
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION A. B.
C. D. E. F.
PERSONNEL
A. COLLECTION B. PROCESSING
C. TRANSFER D. ADMINISTRATION
OTHER
A. B.
TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSE
MONTHLY REVENUE REVENUE
A. ALUMINUM ( )LBS/TONS B. GLASS ( )LBS/TONS
C. PAPER ( )LBS/TONS
D. PLASTIC ( ) LBS /TONS
E. OTHER ( )LBS/TONS
TmAL MONTHLY REVENUE LESS TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSE
NET GAIN (SHORTAGE)
=s==e=P
6
EXHIBIT B BI-MONTHLY REPORT PAGE 3
SECTION 111: COMMENTS
CARLSBAD RECYCLING PROGRAM
EXHIBIT B BI-MONTHLY REPORT PAGE 4
,
CARLSBAD RECYCLING PILOT PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT MONTHLY COLLECTION REPORT FOR , 1989
REPORT DUE-TO U & M DEPT.- JUL 15, SEPT 15, AND NOV 15, 1989
SECTION I: COLLECTION DATA
A. LBS ALUMINUM COLLECTED B. LBS GLASS COLLECTED C. LBS PAPER COLLECTED D. LBS PLASTIC COLLECTED E. LBS OTHER COLLECTED
TOTAL LBS COLLECTED
SECTION 11: BALANCE SHEET
MONTHLY EXPENSES: COST FOR MONTH MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION A. B. C.
D.
E. F.
PERSONNEL A. COLLECTION B. PROCESSING C. TRANSFER D. ADMINISTRATION
OTHER
A. B.
TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSE
MONTHLY REVENUE REVENUE
A. ALUMINUM ( )LBS/TONS B. GLASS ( ) LBS /TONS
C. PAPER ( )LBS/TONS D. PLASTIC ( )LBS/TONS E. OTHER ( )LBS/TONS 4 TOTAL MONTHLY REVENUE LESS TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSE
NET GAIN (SHORTAGE)
=====3=:
EXHIBIT B MONTHLY REPORT PAGE 1
CARLSBAD RECYCLING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
EVALUATION OF PROMOTIONAL PROGRAM -
REPORT DUE TO UTILITIES AND MAINTENANCE DEPT. - JUNE 15, 1989
EXHIBIT B PROMOTION REPORT PAGE 1
CARLSBAD RECYCLING PILOT PROJECT
6-M#!PH REPORE
REPORT DUEJ’O UTILITIES AND MAINTENANCE DEPT. - NOV 15, 1989
SECTION I: COLLECTIOH DATA
a.
b.
CI
do
e.
f.
9.
NUMBER OF HOMES
# OF HOUSEHOLDS SET-OUT AREA1
AREA2 - mi#L
SET-OUT RATE
AREA1
AREA2 TOTAL
# OF HOUSEHOLDS PARTIC IPATIIO PER MOHTH
-1 AREA2 TOTAL
PARTICIPATION RATE
AREA1
AREA2 TOTAL
PARTICIPATIOlQtSET-OUT RATIO AREA1 AREA2 TOTAL
COLLECTION DATA: ALUMINUM AREA1 AREA2 TOTAL
AREA 1 AREA2 TOTAL
GLASS
EXHIBIT B 6-MONTH REPORT PAGE 1
bo
i.
1-
PAPER AREA1
AREA2 WAL PLASTIC AREA1
AREA2
TOTAL
TOTAZ, LBS. COLLECTED
EFFICIENCY RATE
AREA1
AREA 2 TOTAL
RECOVERY RATE AREA1 AREA2 TOTAL
SECTION 11: SUPPLEMElUTARY DATA
COLLECTION TOTAL FOR EN!l!IRE PILOT PROJECT (IN LBS)
MAY JZRQE JULY AUQ SEPT OCT NOV nrpAL
-1
ARBAZ TOTAL
GLASS AREA1 AREA2 TOTAL
PAPER AREA1
AREA2
mAL
EXHIBIT B 6-MONTH REPORT PAGE 2
SECTION 111: RALANC'E SfIEET
TOTAL EXPENSES OF PILOT PROJECT:
INITIAL PROMOTIOR
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION
A. B.
C.
E. F.
PERSONNEL
A. COLLECTION B. PROCESSING C. TRANSFER D. ADMINISTRATION
A. B.
EXPENSE
mAL REVENUE OF PROJECT
A. ALUMINUM ( B. GLASS (
C, PAPER ( De PLASTIC ( E- OTHER
) LBS/TO#S
) LBS/TOIW 1 LBS/TONS 1 LBS/TONS
) LBS/TOWS
EXHIBIT B 6-MONTH REPORT PAGE 3
SECTION IV: COMMEXPS
EXHIBIT B 6-MONTH REPORT PAGE 4
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
& LIBERTY RECYCLING
RECYCLING OPTIONS FOR THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD
JANUARY 6, 1989
Enclosed are the various recycling alternatives considered as the
most viable options for the City of Carlsbad. We have prepared
six (6) plans, A through F, which have different curb side
elements for each and the rest of the elements being common to
all plans. The plans proposed are of various types of segregated
collection to maintain a higher market value. To achieve the waste reduction goals mandated by the City of Carlebad and the County of San Diego, the plans must be implemented over a period of time and not all at once to develop and maintain consistancy of programs and maintain the support of the entire community.
The following page is a diagram of the programs in brief.
We have attempted to answer all of the questions raised in the City's review of the preliminary Proposal presented in December. To expedite the program's effective date, we will be available to answer any other questions. The pIans developed are felt to be the best alternatives for the City. With Staff and Coast Waste working collectively on the implementation, any vaeances which
arise will be cognizant to both parties involved and can have
immediate attention if necessary. For this we propose the City to appoint one of the City Staff to be program coordinator with Coast Waste.
PAGE 1 EXHIBIT C
-. ?
c, U c 0 -- E -0 VI U'I-
3- u 0- aJ L 0-
nwc,
m n E .r
I aJ0
U W Y U
W - x
VI .C VI LI h c, .C
7 .-
aJ Ea .r - VI moc +J woo1 c EOP w 0 -x u UhaJ .r h VI LdFI) aJ
L 0 -'c U
Q- m
.r c, In 0
0 U
P
c 0
C,
c, v,
.I-
m
L aJ 'c VI c
v W > 0 L n n m
4 VI L c VI
h c, r a 0 V
E aJ c 3
0) c,
VI aJ c,
U m
c, VI
0 u
c,
m
m
aJ L a C, 3 Q- '", 4 N
E 0
.r Y
m
m c, VI L aJ
+J e aJ U
a aJ L c, VI
u 0)
0 U
7 e U aJ
0 n
aJ c, VI :
c 0
c, U 0)
.r
7
? 0) > aJ U
c, c 4 E aJ c, W
0 I-
n C 0 U
I
c, .r
e 7
U c m
Y- Y- O
CT 0 L V
K
0 .-
U
aJ L
3 c, U a,
0 W
7 c
? m .- U 0 0 r L 0
r m
aJ c
n
.r
i Q- 0 in a LU ale c, *C E w- v- w m>
01 c, VI 4 3
E 0
c,
4 L
.-
m CT h Y .r .I- aJ*uuc,
.. aJ c,
c) m c .. c, L
c, v,
m
. . . . . . . . . . curnemw ***a* .. Y VI c, c 0) E.
w-
- U m n E c-. U aJ c, U 0) .- m U VI
I& .I-
..... wwwww
0-
n L ***a
PAGE 2
n
EXHIBIT C
i
The following section delineates the curb side elements of the six (6) plans first with the other common elements following this section. -
PLBNSATHROUGHECURBSIDECOLLECTION
PLAN A, ELEMENT 1
1000 HOME CURB SIDE WITH SEGREGATED COLLECTION
This option proposes to use two - 500 home areas located in different sections of the City. The 1000 home pilot would provide the City with information on the best suited containers, participation rates and operating data to determine the fiscal impact for the residents of Carlsbad. The pilot program would be operated for nine months with the program data on the first six months submitted for City review. We would continue the collection on those homes while the City makes its review.
The recyclables will be segregated by the homeowner and stored for weekly collection on trash day in three stackable containers.
Residents would recycle aluminum cans, glass bottles and
newsprint. The stackable containers are not the least costly of
the containers but of the programs reviewed they have the widest acceptance and higher participation rates. We propose the containers to be purchased by the City so grants would then be available for funding the purchase of the containers.
Coast Waste would fund the nine month pilot collection program expenses other than the cost of the containers. After review and recommendation the City will establish funding to pay for the ongoing program costs.
Parameters Used to Develop Projection
Containers:
The choice was narrowed down to the use of three stackable
containers for each household. Stackable containers have been widely used throughout curb sides because of ease in handling,
sturdiness, and accessibility while stacked and in use.
We have reviewed two types of stackable containers from two different manufacturers. Both manufacturers provide declining balance replacement warranties based on a five-year life. Both manufacture containers in Southern California. We have received
two bids for purchasing the containers. The first bid is $4.60 per container covering all associated costs. The rcond bid is
for $5.35 per container excluding shipping, handli'g, tax and some print work. Both suppliers can provide us with containers within 45 days of request for the 3000 needed for the pilot.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 3
.-
Containers: (continued) We have opted to use three stackable containers as opposed to fewer contain-ers to maintain higher market grades for the material which can only be done at the participant's level. The three containers could be used to store more than the original three commodities as other commodities become viable. For this we recommend that the containers not be labeled for the types of material to accomodate for expanding the materials recycled.
Recyclables collected: The most common recyclable8 diverted from the waste stream are
aluminum cans, bottle glass, newsprint, and cardboard. Plastic
bottles could be flattened and mixed in with the aluminum cans. However, the amounts of plastic collected from other programs have been minimal with limited data available. Plastic bottles can be diverted. However, they have less marketability. We would be willing to make plastic a part of the pilot program if
SO requested by the City.
Weekly Collection: Weekly collection has been choosen to make it as easy as possible for the households to participate in the program. Other program8 studied indicate that better participation occurs with a weekly collection where the homeowner places his materials out when the containers are full.
Areas for the Pilot study:
Area 1 will be approximately 500 homes in Carlebad proper within the boundaries of: Elm Avenue, Celinda, Chestnut and Highland. This area was choosen for the mix of types of homes, street and traffic patterns. Collection day for this area will be Tuesday. Route patterns and addresses of the homes paritcipating in the pilot will be provided to the City.
Area 2 will also be approximately 500 hundred homes in the La
Costa area of Carlsbad. This area will be within the streets of La Coeta Avenue, Levante, and El Camino Real. This area has
single family residences and multi-tenant housing with curb refuse service.
Collection Vehicles: We have looked at various types of collection equipment. One option would be to utilize a vehicle similar to a front loader vehicle for approximately $80,000. The other option would be to
purchase a bin trailer/tractor combination for approximately $58,000. We have opted at the present to go with either using bin trailers or low entry trucks with hydraulic dumping boxes for the commodities. We are looking into having one of our low entry trucks refitted with hydraulic boxes for recycling#which could be used for the program or be utilized as a spare.
New low entry cab trucks $64,000 each Tractor $40,000 each
Trailer with automated bin dumping $18,000 each
Trailere without automated bins $ 8,000 each
EXHIBIT C PAGE 4
Advertising:
Mailings to pilot homes Notices on billing statements Trash can tags or door hangers Publicize program through free community Cable TV Press releases regarding the program prior to start
Signs on our recycling trucks and residential refuse trucks
Community awareness programs (speaker presentation)
Records : P/L information will be submitted quarterly with the information
displayed showing the monthly information. The six-month information will be used to access the plan for further implementation.
Participation will be verified by using truck counters on vehicles to show total stops per month. Twice per month a physical count of 50 units in each area will be conducted. Materials collected will be weighed on day of collection with a second verification via our shipping receipts. These receipts are required to be segregated from buy back center volumes per California State requirements for receipt of redemption money.
Capitalization
For the Pilot program the equipment will be donated from the
existing operation of Coast Waste Management. Acquiring a low
entry recycling truck on lease at this point is not available. We
are looking into converting one of our own low entry trucks for recycling. If any equipment is purchased or is eventually used in the City-wide program, the equipment would come in at the
capitalization less the value for the time used or be utilized as
a spare. Coast Waste would cover the costs of the equipment either through use or as contributed equipment for the City's program.
Estimated Operating Costs - 1000 Pilot Program Expenses: Containers $ 14,900
TOTAL COSTS * 24,709 Operating Costs 9.809
REVENUE Aluminum Glass Bottle8 Newsprint TOTAL REVENUE
2,673
1,350
291. 4 , 320
TOTAL REVENUE 4,320 24 , 709 TOTAL EXPENSES
NET PILOT COST COVERED (820,389 1 BY COAST UASTE MANAGEMENT
__---- ------
EXHIBIT C PAGE 5
* Capitalization costs for equipment cannot be determined at this
time as it depends on the equipment used in the pilot collection.
Start up prom-otional costs, increased accounting expenses, and verification data will incur more expenses initially. The
expenses for these items will be detailed in the data submitted
to the City for review. The City of Carlsbad's selected program
coordinator will have more time allocated to this phase of the program for which it needs to be accounted. Coast Waste has assumed this will be a shared cost and in-kind service.
Plastic Bottles As requested by the City, we have reviewed the collection of PET plastic bottles and other milky clear plastic bottles. The ' information on collection of these bottles is limited. We
propose that they be collected at one of the two pilot areas to
get a comparison of the additional costs and revenues. The
plastic could be mixed with the aluminum cans in the same
stackable container. We have made the following estimates for
the plastic bottles.
Projection
Income PET Bottles $32 Other Plastic bottles la5 TOTAL INCOME 167 EXPENSES Collection 187
Materials 6 Containers no charge --
Hauling other 12 PET not enough to sell -- Processing 35 NET SHORT FALL (67)
This is based on 1 PET bottle per month per resident and .5 lbs
of clear plastic bottles. This is only our beet estimation of costs for the material and collection amounts. Some of the pertinent costs in collecting plastics are the storage costs and costs of economically baling the material with the type of baler presently in use by our company. The amount projected for a year would amount to 1 1/2 bales of PET and 28 bales of other
plastics. This would require us to use a roll off container to hold them until we had sufficient amount to ship in one bale. The cost of containers has not been included in the price of
operation. A year's collection would amount to approximately 15 tons of plastic.
The milky clear plastic juice, milk, and water jug8 would amount to more material than the PET bottles. The price for the clear plastic bottles is .10 cents per pound at present. In speaking to an induetry expert, the PET bottles collected now &om the AB
2020 bottle bill are stock piling due to no market demand for the
product. Many of the processors are holding the material.
These materials would amount to a small portion of the waste stream. The pilot would identify the merits of these as
recyclables.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 6
PLAN B, ELEMENT 1
SEGREGATED CITY WIDE CURB SIDE COLLECTION
This option as requested by the City is to show the time for
implementation of a City-wide curb side collection. This program
will take longer to setup due to the lead time for equipment. We feel that this program has merit. However, without empirical data which could be derived from a pilot phase, assumptions such as resident participation and operating costs would have to be subsidized from the onset. An additional concern of ours is the timing and available funding for containers. The method of recycling with three stackable containers is the most prevalent and is being established in more cities now initiating programs. Even though the three container program is widely used, most cities have started their programs via pilots. For these reasons we are encouraging the use of a pilot.
Many of the parameters have already been highlighted in the previous section (Plan A, 1000 home pilot). As in that pilot program, this plan has the residents utilizing three segregated containers for separation of the materials prior to collection.
The program as indicated in the diagram would require more time
for initial start up but the project would be completed approximately in the same time as the proposal with the 1000 home pilot (Plan A). Should the City decide to have the entire City brought "on-line" with a curb side program, it can be accomplished in a shorter time frame. However, the City would need to indicate to Coast Waste prior to implementation when and what amounts of funding would be available for containers.
We would opt to have the information on the program's operating
costs, volumes, and participation rates submitted to the City
quarterly with monthly data provided for the first year of the
program. We propose, after review of the program's first
complete year of collection, that the information be reduced to semi-annual submission to the City. Books and records would be available for the City to review.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 7
Projection for Segregated City Wide Curb Side Collection
(Based of 30% Participation of 16,000 Residents)
CAPITALIZATION COSTS
TOTAL COST
Collection: Trucks - 3 192,000
Material handling: Forklift - used 7,000
Loader - used 43,500
9 roll off containers 36.ooo 278,500 Household Containers $16/set 256,000 Promotional Costs 19 200
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS $ 553,700
-- DESCRIPTION Site Equipment:
------- -------
ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS
Lease Expenee Prorata Insurance Prorata & Vehicles Labor (Gross) Collection
Collection
Processing
Processing
Transfer Glass
Adm inis t rat ion Vehicles Operating Maintenance Materials & Supplies Container Replacement Equipment Operating Maintenance Materials & Supplies
Aluminum
1%
Marketing (Shipping Expenses) Utilities & Postage Travel Accounting / Legal
Miscellaneous
Liceneee Promotional Sustainment
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
TOTAL CAPITALIZATION COSTS ANNUAL
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS LESS SEARED CAPITAL
ANNUAL COST --
50,700
1,900 11,500 9.500 73,600 51,200 4,700
$ 129,500
------ ------
$12) 000 4,000 71,800 10,400 3,700 1,100 28,000 8,800
900
200
2,560
3,600
1 ) 200
1,200 4 000 4,000 500 2,400 1,500 4 800
5,600
$172,760 129,500
$30& 260
------
-------- --------
EXHIBIT C PAGE 8
INCOME PROJECTION
Aluminum Can=- 1 lb per participant Glass Bottles 10 lbs per participant Newspaper 22 lbs per participant
Material Tonnage $/Ton Total Revenue Aluminum Cans 28.8 1980 $57,024 Glass Bottles 288 100 28,800 Newspaper 633.6 10 6.336 GROSS INCOME 92,160 LESS: TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS 302.260 NET GAIN (SHORTAGE) ($210,100)
RESIDENTIAL MONTHLY CHARGE $l.OS/MONTH
RESIDENTIAL CHARGE LESS CONTAINER COST $ .82/MONTH
NET COST PER TON OF RECYCLING MATERIAL $221 /TON
REFUSE COST PER TON OF RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE AT:
2 TONS PER HOUSEHOLD $45.60 /TON
1 TON PER HOUSEHOLD $91.20 /TON
The landfill diversion cost of $9,979 (5 cents per month) is applicable. This cost is part of the price formula of the Carlsbad Refuse Rate Index and would show up as reduced service cost for trash collection via reduced landfill costs at this time .
Adding plastic bottles wae not added to the projection for Plan B
since this would be a material which should be further studied
before implemented City-wide. Figures for this have been prepared and can be provided upon request.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 9
PUN C, ELEMENT 1
PARTIALLY COMgINGLED CURB SIDE SORTED AT COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT
This program will take longer to implement since it will take time for the modification to our existing facility. This program is more costly than the other methods due to the higher capitalization expenses for the building and equipment.
We feel that the homeowner with this type of program will be placing his containers out at the curb more often as opposed to
using the three segregated containers. He will more than likely
have less storage space for the items which on an overall basis will probably not reduce the collection costs.
This system of collection poses more costs initially. With the three segregated containers $here would be ample room for the placement of other materials to be collected whereas with only two there would be less space for other recyclables causing some materials to be averted from the recycling system.
All other aspects of the program would be similar to the other two previously mentioned programs.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 10
.
Projection for Partially Commingled Curb Side
Sorted at Coast Waste Management -
(Based of 30% Participation of 16,000 Residents)
CAPITALIZATION COSTS
DESCBIPTIOl Site Equipment: Collection: Trucks - 3 Material handling: Forklift - used Loader - used Conveyor Dumping System
Can Separator Crusher 9 roll off containers
Household Containers $16/set
Promotional Costs
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS
TOTAL COST 30,000
192,000
7,000 43,500 125 $ 000 6 $ 000 36.ooo 439 $500
171 $ 200 19 $200
$629,900
- - - - - - - -------
ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS Lease Expense Prorata Insurance Prorata & Vehicles
Labor (Gross) Collection Processing Transfer Glass
Administration Collection Vehicles Operating
Aluminum
Maintenance
Materiale & Supplies Container Replacement 1%
Processing Equipment Operating Maintenance Materials & Supplies
Marketing (Shipping Expenses) Utilities & Postage Travel Accounting / Legal Miscellaneous
Licenses Promotional Sustainment
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS TOTAL CAPITALIZATION COSTS ANNUAL
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS LESS SEARED CAPITAL
ANNUAL
(=OST 7 $900
50,700
1 $900 11 $ 500 33,000 1,600 9.500 116,100
34,240 4,700
$155,040
------ --e---
$18 $ 000 4,000 71,800
36,900 3 $ 700 1,100 28,000 8,800
900
200 1,712 4,200 1,400 1,400 4,000 5,200 500 2 $ 450 1,500 4,800 5,600
$206,262
155,040
$361,364
------
-------- --------
EXHIBIT C PAGE 11
.-
INCOME PROJECTION
Aluminum Cans- 1 lb per participant
Glass Bottles 10 lbs per participant
Newspaper 22 lbs per participant
Hater ia 1 Tonnage $/Ton Total Revenue
Aluminum Cans 28.8 1980 $57,024 Glass Bottles 288 100 28 , 800 Newspaper 633.6 10 6.336 GROSS INCOME 92,160 LESS: TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS 361.364 NET GAIN (SHORTAGE) ($269,204)
RESIDENTIAL MONTHLY CHARGE $1.40/MONTH
RESIDENTIAL CHARGE LESS CONTAINER COST $1.22/MONTH
NET COST PER TON OF RECYCLING MATERIAL $283/TON
REFUSE COST PER TON OF RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE AT: 2 TONS PER HOUSEHOLD $45.60 /TON 1 TON PER HOUSEHOLD $91.20 /TON
PLAN D, ELELlENT 1.
CHARITABLE GROUPS, SATURDAY COLLECTION
This program would be used in conjunction with the neighborhood collection centers where, at these sites, Coast Waste would have drop boxes set up for the collection of materials. We would help
set up and establish routes for collection drives but would only
provide boxes for the materials at no charge. Participation in a
voluntary program like this has varied. In the City of Seattle,
for example, it was estimated that 25% of the material was being
donated to the charitable drives and donation bin sites that were run in that City prior to the implementation of curb side programs.
This program understandably is hard to assess. The amounts that could additionally be diverted beyond what is presently being done is an unknown. However, use of this program could provide additional diversion of material from the waste stream.
This program would be funded by Coast Waste through its plan for
the Neighborhood Collection Centers proposed budge . 0
EXHIBIT C PAGE 12
PLAN E, ELEMENT 1
COMMINGLED CUBSIDE RECYCLABLES SORTED BY DRIVER AT CURB, CITY WIDE
These homeowners will sort their material into two containers, one for newsprint and one for aluminum cans and glass bottles. The materials will be sorted by the driver at the curb prior to returning to the center for batching for shipment to market. Thie method of commingled recyclables can be accomplished easier than the eorting of material at our facility since it will not
require the building space which is being utilized by our
transfer etation.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 13
Projection for Commingled Curb Side Becyclables
Sorted by Driver at Curb, City Wide -
(Based of 30% Participation of 16,000 Residents)
CBPITALIZATION COSTS
DESCBIPTION Site
Equipment:
Collection: Trucks - 3
Material handling:
Forklift - used
Loader - used
Can Separator Crusher
9 roll off containers
Household Containers $10.70/set Promotional Costs
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS
TOTAL
(=OST --
192,000
7,000 43,500 6,000 36.ooo 284,500 171,200 19,200
474,900
------- -------
ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS
Lease Expense Prorata
Insurance Prorata & Vehicles Labor (Gross) Collection Processing Transfer Glass
Administration
Collection Vehicles Operating
Aluminum
Maintenance
Materials & Supplies
Container Replacement 1%
Processing Equipment Operating
Marketing (Shipping Expenses) Utilities & Postage Travel Accounting / Legal Miscellaneous
Licenses Promotional Sustainment
Maintenance Materials & Supplies
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS TOTAL CAPITALIZATION COSTS ANNUAL
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS LESS SEABED CAPITAL
EXHIBIT C
ANNUAL COST
50,700
1,900
11,500 1,600 9.500 75,200 34,240 4,700
114.140
--
------ ------
$12,000 4,000 105,400
10,400
3,700 1,100 28,000 10,560 1,000
200
1,712 4,200
1,400
1,400 4,000
4,000
500
2,450
1,500 4,800 5,600
$20 922
------
11 2. ,140 -------- --------
$322,062
PAGE 14
.. .. .
.-
INCOME PROJECTION
Aluminum Cans- 1 lb per participant Glass Bottles 10 lbs per participant Newspaper 22 lbs per participant
Material Tonnage $/Ton Total Revenue Aluminum Cane 28.8 1980 $57,024 Glass Bottles 288 100 28,800 Newspaper 633.6 10 6.336 GROSS INCOME 92,160 LESS: TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS 322.062 NET GAIN (SHORTAGE) ($229,902)
RESIDENTIAL MONTHLY CHARGE $1.20/MONTH
RESIDENTIAL CHARGE LESS CONTAINER COST $1.02/MONTH
NET COST PER TON OF RECYCLING MATERIAL $242/TON
REFUSE COST PER TON OF RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE AT:
2 TONS PER HOUSEHOLD $45.60 /TON
1 TON PER HOUSEHOLD $91.20 /TON
PLAN F, ELKLIENT 1
COMMINGLED RECYCLING MATERIAL SORTED AT COAST WASTE
To implement a plan using a commingled collection system where paper, cans (steel, and aluminum), glass bottles and plastic are
sorted will require approximately 10,000 square foot of space to
house the sorting equipment. This would require additional space in conjunction with that already utilized by the existing recycling operation. We would need to locate and build a facility for the development of a plant as such.
We operate a transfer station at the present to reduce the trash hauling costs. This part of our operation requires approximately forty percent of our space used as a daily holding area during transfer. The space of this portion of our building
is approximately the size required for the recycling. If this . alternative was setup we would be required to build or locate
space to sort the recyclables. This would further delay the implementation of a recycling program.
4
EXHIBIT C PAGE 15
.. ."
Projection for Commingled Curb Side Recycling
Curb side Collection City wide
(Based of 30% Participation of 16,000 Residents)
CAPITALIZATION COSTS
DESCBIPTION Site: Building $300M + Land Equipment:
Collection: Trucks - 2
Material handling:
Forklift - used
Loader - used
Seperation System
2 Can Separator Crushers
9 roll off containere
Household Containers $10.70/eet
Promotional Costs
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS
TOTAL COST 300,000
128 , 000
7,000 43 , 500 200,000 12 , 000 48.ooo 738,500 171 , 200 19,200
928,900
------- -------
ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS Lease Expense Prorata Insurance Prorata & Vehicles
Labor (Gross) Collection
Processing Transfer Glaes Aluminum Plastic Administration Collection Vehicles Operating
Maintenance
Materials & Supplies
Container Replacement 1%
Proceesing Equipment Operating
Maintenance Materials & Supplies Marketing (Shipping Expenses) Utilities & Postage Travel
Accounting / Legal Miscellaneous Licenses Promotional Sustainment
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS TOTAL CAPITALIZATION COSTS ANNUAL
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS LESS SEARED CAPITAL
ANNUAL COST 36,700
33,800
1 , 900 11 , 500 42 , 000 3,200 12.700 141,800
18 , 000 12 , 000
47,900
55,250
3,700 1 , 100 200 28 , 000 7,800
700
150 1,712 4,200 1,700 1,400 5,350
6 , 000
500 2 , 500
1 , 500
3,200
5 , 600
$20&;462
180,740
$389,202
-- ---
_------- --------
EXHIBIT C PAGE 16
z
INCOME PROJECTION
Plastic - -64 lbs per participant Steel Can 1.5 lbs per participant Aluminum Cans 1 lbs per participant Glass Bottles 10 lbs per participant Newspaper 22 lbs per participant
Material Tonnage Plastic 16 Steel Cane 43.2 Aluminum Cans 28.8 Glass Bottles 288
Newspaper 633.6
GROSS INCOME
LESS: TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS NET GAIN (SHORTAGE)
$/Ton Total Revenue - 4,170 10 432
1980 $57,024 100 28 , 800
10 6.336 96 , 762 389.202 ($292,440)
RESIDENTIAL MONTHLY CHARGE $1.52/MONTH
RESIDENTIAL CHAUQE LRW CONTAINER COQT $1.34/MONTH
NET COST PER TON OF RECYCLING MATERIAL $290/TON
REFUSE COST PER TON OF RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE AT: 2 TONS PER HOUSEHOLD $45.60 /TON
1 TON PER HOUSEHOLD $91.20 /TON
This projection use6 a 30 year amortization for the building estimated at $300,000, the equipment with a 7 year payout, vehicle6 with a 5 year payout .
EXHIBIT C PAGE 17
ELEMENT 2, PROCESSING AND SITE REDUCTION CENTER
As stated in_the Preliminary Plan, the continued use of the Source Separation Center has benefited the City of Carlsbad with the reduction of materials already going into the County landfill. The cardboard material collected and recycled at Coast Waste Management's facility was generated, not through the buy-back center, but from the refuse loads dumped on the separation floor of the Transfer Station. The County of San Diego in its recent waste stream study indicated that there was approximately 7.5% of the waste stream composed of marketable
cardboard. The material which comes into the center would not
have to be picked up additionally by the collection trucks and
diverted through the system which has not cost the City any funds
at all. We could with a high density system possibly double the
volume with improved equipment.
The cardboard recycled from Coast Waste Management in Carlebad is
as follows:
CARDBOARD RECYCLED 1987 908,380 LBS 454.2 TONS 1988* 829,120 LBS 414.5 TONS
*This represents only 11 months of cardboard.
This cardboard volume is substantial and should be calculated as
part of the material diverted to meet our waste diversion goals.
This amounts to half of the material which is proposed in the
curb side collection.
This recycling was conducted without City subsidies for the
venture with the City of Carlsbad receiving benefit of this with
reduced landfill expenses.
The preliminary plan proposed to the City was for the City to assist Coast Waste in obtaining grant funds for a higher capacity baler which will increase the volume of materials baled. Additionally, we proposed for the City to support us in leasing additional land for the use of expanding our recycling efforts.
This was proposed without requiring any funds from the City's
funding sources.
This recycling income is accounted for in the financial statements audited by the City when reviewing our books and
records for Refuse Index Increases.
@ ELEMENT 3, I4EIGEBOREOOD DROP OFF CENTERS
This element would develop a network of community collection
centers. Residents would then have an alternative for donating recyclables. This would be carried out in Plans A and D. In
Plan A (the 1000 home pilot) it would be used to gain more emperical data and, in Plan D for the implementation of
collection and processing the materials collected by the groups. EXHIBIT C PAGE 18
This system of recycling operating costs and others would be
funded by Coast Waste. No funding from the City would be
required other than as suggested previously in grant funding for
containers to aid the program‘s collections.
ELEMENT 4, BUY BACX CENTER
Having a California Certified Buy Back Center was one of the
original facets of a recycling program requested by Staff. This has been accomplished as requested. The Center adds to the
overall City plan by providing the only commercial recycling
center. The Center establishes a place for the people to recycle
who do not wish to participate in a curb side whether it be for
personal gain or for a charitable group.
The majority of the individuals who divert recyclable materials at the Carlsbad location are Carlsbad residents. This volume could be added with the materials collected from the Charitable
organizations’ bins and drives and added to the amount collected
by the curb side program. As Stated by Ralph Anderson a recycling program needs to have more than one facet of recycling
to make the volume reduction mandated. This is only another
method which helps in completing the recycling circle.
ELEMENT 5, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, MULTI TENANT COLLECTION
Coast Waste already provides service for the commercial, industrial, and multi-tenant collection on a voluntary basis. We will continue to provide bins for these with no charge to the participants. commercial recycling plan for the these groups. However, to implement a plan of this type, various ordinances will have to be established to cover the cost of placement and servicing the bins
at the specified locations. We will need to have work in close accord with the City’s recycling coordinator to set up a fee
system for presentation to Council. Another alternative to cover the cost is for the County to install resource diversion credite
which would provide the additional economic incentives necessary
to get the participation.
Coast Waste Management has worked on developing a
We have, at the present, a collection system for bar and restaurant glass. This is being conducted with four establishements of the 27 in the City which have alcoholic
beverages served. Only one of the restaurants on service meet
the required volumes set by the Glass Packaging Institutes Program. To start up additional businesses we would have to set out special down-sized containers. This would req equipment for handling with a recycling rate estab the operating costs.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 19
ELEMEI?T 6, VEGATATIVE WASTE COLLECTION
This program _cannot be divised until a site has been established for composting in the County. Materials could be collected with the recycling trucks possibly running on the same collection route. However, this would require more trips to the load separation center. Possibly the recycling trucks could be coupled with trailers for hauling vegatative waste. With the likelihood of the composting center being some distance from the Coast Waste facility, it would be prudent for the material to be transfered into larger vehicles for transit to the composting site.
This material has been considered in making this proposal.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Loader : Loaders for handling materials such as glass need to have different specifications and in calling for price quotes for new and used equipment we obtained prices ranging from $35,000 to
$73,500 with the low end piece of equipment needing to have tires
converted for use glass.
Lease payments: This amount has been reassessed and is based on the amount for the area utilized for recycling.
Administration:
This cost is based on the salaries posted for a recycling director as in other municipalities or for qualified help in the
trash industry.
Collection vehicles Operating:
The costs accessed are for fuels oils lubricants and filters.
Collection Vehicles Maintenance: This area has been reduced since the equipment will be new. Funds allocated to this category are included in case repairs are
necessary.
Processing Equipment Operating and Maintenance:
The costs are for maintaining the equipment and servicing the
used forklift, loader and container repairs (painting) which would be purchased.
Marketing: Marketing is the shipping expense for delivery of ass and
hauling rate to the markets to whom we sell our recyclables.
aluminum to market, less the labor expense at the #t andard
Licenses :
This amount was under stated using our vehicle licensing cost for our older vehicles. These new vehicles will have a license fee each of approximately $1,600 annually.
EXHIBIT C PAGE 20
J" EXHIBIT 3 -3 Agenda Bill No. 9%%4
March 7, 1989
TO: RAY PATCHETT, CITY MANAGER
VIA: Frank Mannen, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Utilities and Maintenance Director
CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN RECYCLING PROGRAMS
Councilmember Mamaux has requested information regarding the capital investment of the Cities of Encinitas and Solana Beach in
their recycling programs. The following information is provided
in response to that request.
Solana Recyclers provides curbside recycling programs in Encinitas,
Solana Beach and Del Mar. The ensuing table outlines the capital expenditures of these programs.
RECYCLING CAPITAL EXPENDITURE
CONTAINERS $55#000 $4,000 $a1200
# OF HOMES
PARTICIPATING 15~000 31700 2?300
' The City provided operation space at Fire Station
* City purchased 3 trucks and leased them to Solana Recyclers. At the end of a 5-year lease, Solana Recyclers will own
trucks
Part of initial start-up cost was for the purchase of a
truck .
t- ,
RAYMOND R. PATCHETT, CITY MANAGER -2- March 7, 1989
DISCUSSION
Solana Recyclers operates with a minimum of capital equipment.
Encinitas purchased two buckets per household, and paid for the initial promotion costs, for a total of $70,500. All other expenses are covered by a $.55 monthly recycling fee paid by the individual households.
Solana Beach pays a $.55 per customer monthly subsidy to Solana Recyclers out of their general fund. Residents are not charged a monthly fee. The City has also purchased $4,000 worth of household
containers, and provided Solana Recyclers with a $6,500 grant to purchase a truck.
Del Mar paid $8,200 for household containers, and $6,650 for start- up costs. All other expenses are covered by the $.55 monthly residential recycling fee charged to the citizens.
The only continuing costs the above cities undergo is the replacement of household containers.
If you have any questions, please contact me at x4114.
// n
ANDERSON
RWA : mew
Attachment
February 14, 1989
TO: UTILITIES/MAINTENANCE DIRECTOR
FROM: Counci 1 Member Mamaux
RECYCLING
How much capital investment was spent on the part of Encinitas and Solana Beach as their start-up and continuing costs on the their recycling programs?
JOHN J. MAMAUX Counci 1 Member
mhs
... ,
-. EXHIBIT 4 o Agenda Bill
March 8, 1989
No. pf3p
TO: FRANK MANNEN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
FROM: Utilities & Maintenance Director
PILOT RECYCLING PROJECT PROPOSAL FROM SOLANA RECYCLERS
During the discussion of Coast Waste's recycling proposal at the February 7, 1989 City Council Meeting, Dennis Price, a citizen of Carlsbad, addressed the Council. He gave a brief synopsis of Solana Recyclers' curbside recycling efforts in some of the
adjacient communities and suggested that Carlsbad should consider Solana Recyclers as an option in their recycling program. Subsequent comments made by Council Member Kulchin indicated that there maybe some interest by the Council with regard to this suggestion. As a result, on February 23, 1989, Solana Recyclers submitted to the City a proposal to conduct a pilot project within the City of Carlsbad. This proposal is similar to Coast Waste Management s pilot project proposal already approved by the City Council on February 7, 1989.
The history of Solana Recyclers is well documented. Solana
Recyclers is a non-profit organization which has been operating
recycling programs in the area since 1983. They currently operate bi-weekly curbside recycling programs in Encinitas, Del Mar and Solana Beach. Having gained a reputation for implementing very successful recycling programs with minimal capital equipment and I1shoe string'' operating budgets, Solana Recyclers was recently named the "Best Curbside Recycling Program in California for 1988" by the California Resource Recovery Association. They currently report a participation rate of 45% in their Encinitas curbside program, which is considerably above industry averages.
A summary of the proposal from Solana Recyclers is provided. The actual proposal and a copy of their City of Encinitas Curbside Recycling Program First Annual Report dated November, 1988, are available if you desire to see them.
Having a non-profit organization, such as Solana Recyclers,
involved in a second pilot project maybe advatageous to the City. The competitive environment and additional information that would result by having two simultaneous pilot projects could eventually
lead to a better City-wide program. The advantages, however, are
overshadowed by the potential dangers of undertaking the additional
pilot project. Competitive pilot projects could negatively impact
our relations with Coast Waste Management and lead to difficulty
in obtaining united efforts in refuse collection and recycling
FRANK MANNEN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER -2- March 8, 1989
programs. Additionally, the City risks misleading one or both of the companies, and confusing the citizens involved in the program. Therefore, I recommend that Solana Recyclers be advised that their efforts are appreciated, but their proposal will not be presented
to the City Council at this time.
If you have any questions, please contact me at x4105.
RWA : mew
Attachment
.' c , r
ATTACHMENT
SUMMARY OF SOLANA RECYCLERS' PROPOSAL
On February 23, 1989, Solana Recyclers submitted to the City a
proposal to conduct a pilot recycling project within the City of Carlsbad. This proposal was extremely comprehensive, addressing every major facet of a successful curbside pilot program, to include: Promotion, Implementation, Reporting and Financing.
Solana Recyclers has outlined a 1,000 home pilot curbside recycling program similar to the one proposed by Coast Waste Management. The
program will consist of two 500-home areas, one in the Tamarack Ave. (East of El Camino Real) area, the other in the La Costa Ave./El Fuerte St. section of the City. The cost of operating the program would be borne entirely by Solana Recyclers, with the City providing the individual household containers and the initial public education materials. The total cost to the City is projected to be between $10,000 and $14,000. Household containers
accounts for the bulk of this cost, with public education material
accounting for $975.00.
The program itself would entail the distribution of two stackable containers and information literature to each household in the pilot project areas. Beginning on May 1, 1989, Solana recyclers would conduct a weekly collection of newspaper, aluminum, glass and plastic. The collection, which would take place on the customer's normal refuse collection days, would be performed by two collection workers using a medium duty diesel truck already owned by Solana Recyclers. Currently having excess capacity in its other recycling programs, Solana Recyclers does not anticipate purchasing any additional capital for this pilot project.
Taking into consideration that the primary purpose of a pilot project is to collect empirical data, the proposal outlines a
comprehensive data collection and reporting system. The information collected would be instrumental in preparing for implementation of an eventual City-wide program. Solana Recyclers
is prepared to provide recycling services to smaller commercial businesses in Carlsbad that, for what ever reason, are not currently being serviced by Coast Waste Management.
In conclusion, the proposal submitted by Solana Recyclers is extremely thorough and the program outlined is certainly feasible
and viable. Although the proposed program would be valuable by itself, when added to the Coast Waste program already approved, it
maybe superfluous.