Prepared for: City of Guelph 1 Carden Street Guelph Ontario N1H 3A1. Prepared by: WSP Group Inc. 600 Cochrane Drive, 5 th Floor Markham, ON L3R 5K3

Transcription

1 City of Guelph Solid Waste Management Master Plan Review April 2014 Prepared for: City of Guelph 1 Carden Street Guelph Ontario N1H 3A1 Prepared by: WSP Group Inc. 600 Cochrane Drive, 5 th Floor Markham, ON L3R 5K3 Project No

2

3 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. OPTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO INCREASE WASTE DIVERSION Long List of Options Options Moved to Recommendations EVALUATION OF OPTIONS Evaluation Criteria Short List of Options QUANTIFYING OPTION IMPACTS OPEN HOUSE # Moving Forward Appendix A Long List of Options

4

5 1. Options and Opportunities to Increase Waste Diversion At this point in the Solid Waste Management Master Plan (SWMMP) Review, a baseline for the City of Guelph has been developed. The Current State report has examined current programs and operations, and the legislative and policy framework in which the City conducts waste management operations. A Future State report has also been developed examining population and housing projections and the potential impact of provincial policies and legislation on the types of future housing developments and waste management infrastructure in the City. The final objective of the SWMMP is to bridge the present review with the future projections, by evaluating a wide variety of options and opportunities to help direct the City of Guelph s waste diversion programs and policies into the future. 1.1 Long List of Options To develop the most complete list of waste diversion program and policy options, the project team engaged in an exercise of research and options development. The purpose of the preliminary research was to identify and document an exhaustive list of policy and program approaches for consideration by City staff and the Steering Committee. The research for this study sought to uncover innovative and visionary municipal policies and programs from North America and Europe that are known to promote and deliver high performing waste prevention and diversion programs. The building of the long-list was accomplished by engaging in a number of research approaches while taking the following information into consideration: Guelph has already reached 68% diversion; Relative to other comparators, the City is doing well with respect to waste diversion; The City s major programs have already been established; A prime opportunity exists, in the near future, for increased development of the multi-residential sector, mainly for medium and high density dwellings. This will result in greater need to develop and promote waste diversion programs in the multi-residential sector; Other opportunities exist to address and promote waste diversion activities in the construction and demolition (C&D) and Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (IC&I) sectors; There are a few recommendations from 2008 that have not been fully addressed; Low cost options include those that address behavioural approaches, such as outreach and public education. While these have associated staff time and material costs, they are intended to prevent and reduce waste at the source and reduce the need for capital infrastructure; The electronic and telephone surveys showed an interest by the respondents in improving multiresidential service, public space recycling, and creating another depot location, but also indicated a desire to do more with less; and, The surveys also demonstrated resistance to Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) or partial PAYT programs. The research conducted to identify innovative and leading-edge waste diversion options, employed a wide variety of resources including: reports, internet research, journal articles, personal contacts and industry sources. Information was collected from a wide variety of jurisdictions, including Canada, the United States, and Europe. Some information was derived from personal experience in the waste management field, and Ontariobased experience from Stewardship Ontario s Effectiveness and Efficiency (E&E) Fund reports and Waste Diversion Ontario s Continuous Improvement Fund (CIF) reports on program upgrades, sustainable financing, and multi-residential recycling. Other reports included waste plans and program assessments recently completed by the project team and published technical papers. The research was supported by discussions with City staff, to identify additional sources, ideas and input to the research process. Additional ideas were added to the list of options as a result of discussions with the Steering Committee and Guelph citizens participating in: Open House #1; focus groups representing local WSP Group Inc. 1

6 business and the downtown sector, residents receiving curbside service and representatives (including residents and property managers) of the multi-residential community; individuals commenting online throughout the process; and, opinions received through the telephone and online surveys. Following the initial research and compilation, an early long-list of waste diversion opportunities contained 95 options to further increase and promote waste diversion in Guelph. See Appendix A for additional detail. The options were grouped under the following headings: General municipal policies and programs; Approaches targeting Residential Programs; Approaches targeting Multi-Residential Programs; Approaches targeting C&D (Construction and Demolition) Programs; and, Approached targeting IC&I (Industrial, Commercial and Institutional) Programs. The long-list of options was reviewed with City staff on December 12, The purpose of this meeting was to review the list and add, combine, remove or expand any of the options prior to meeting with the Steering Committee. During the discussion: A few options were dropped from further consideration because the City had implemented the approach, or was in the process of implementing a similar variation; Many were combined, usually because they were similar and could be considered as a single approach which had a number of variations; and, Some were removed because they were strategies that could not be directly controlled by the City or were not part of the City s mandate. Following the December 12 meeting, the project team updated the long list accordingly. The initial longlist was reduced to a short list of 22 options that were brought forward to the Steering Committee for further consideration. A further sixteen (16) options were advised to be forwarded as recommendations. These recommendations, which are noted below, were shared with the Steering Committee on January 13, 2014 along with the evaluation options and later presented to the public at the February 20, 2014 Open House # Options Moved to Recommendations As noted, during the review process with City staff, sixteen (16) options were advised to be forwarded as recommendations for various reasons including: The option or activity could not be fully explored within the context of a strategic report and will require the development of a detailed list of sub-options and conditions that require a business plan and possible exploration through a formal process; Some of the activities have already been budgeted and the options serve as implementation advice; and, Several were considered to constitute general advice that the Steering Group felt appropriate for discussion in the report. These sixteen (16) recommendations are outlined below in four major areas: municipal (options that generally have either a broader range than each of the three individual categories that follow, or are internal to the City itself), residential, multi-residential and construction and demolition. Municipal Explore alternative methods for recovery of designated materials: Such alternative methods could include collection events, special mobile services, additional curbside collection opportunities or depots, bulky item program expansion, or other departmental environmental initiatives. The service could target materials not currently collected for diversion at the curbside, which may include construction and demolition materials, electronics, and household hazardous or special waste. Examine diversion of additional materials at the public drop-off depot: City staff will continue to explore adding new divertible materials at its public drop-off depot at the Waste Resource Innovation WSP Group Inc. 2

7 Centre (WRIC). Some suggestions from the public include expansion of construction and demolition materials (carpet, window glass, vinyl siding), mattresses, furniture, organic collection, and plastic film and polystyrene. Investigate establishment of a reuse centre at the public drop-off depot: Consider the development of a multi-purpose drop-off centre to augment the drop-off depot at the WRIC. The City would possibly partner with community benefit organizations to manage reusable goods, such as C&D materials, gently used goods, and textiles. Opportunities may also include partnering with an educational institution or program to provide fix/repair materials for apprenticeship training. Promote waste less principles and policies: Help residents, through education, to make purchasing decisions that reduce waste. The concept of reducing waste over time can be promoted through a variety of strategies and policy instruments including pre-cycling, smart shopping, extended producer responsibility, and eco-labelling on retail shelves. Residents will be given information to help them think about excess packaging, purchasing in bulk, reducing food waste, reusing containers and bags and other initiatives that help reduce waste at the source. Conduct a comprehensive audit review and response program to better understand waste generation and diversion opportunities: A four season waste audit in the single family and multiresidential sectors and the public drop-off will help the City to better understand issues of waste generation, contamination of materials, and diversion opportunities. As part of the study, set-outs and capacity monitoring could be undertaken to study participation rates in the different material streams (recyclables, organics, garbage). The City may also include audits of residue from WRIC site activities such as the Material Recovery Facility and Organic Waste Processing Facility. Explore share and reuse initiatives: Work with community groups and/or organizations to establish initiatives that promote waste reduction and reuse, such as an art exchange centre, tool share libraries, fix-it clubs, swapping/share events and little free libraries. These may be neighbourhood and/or city wide initiatives. Analyze expansion of downtown core public space recycling: Work with the downtown residential and business sector to complete a study determining the most effective recycling approaches, containers, and promotion and education materials. Continue to enforce proper waste sorting practices: The collection crews have the authority to not collect material that contains improperly sorted or non-collectable materials such as construction and demolition materials and household hazardous waste. Consider adding more materials to the noncollectable waste list (e.g. materials that could have a number of convenient alternative collection programs, such as depots and Take It Back programs). Explore disposal alternatives: At appropriate times in agreements and waste disposal contract cycles, explore alternatives to landfill, including Energy-from-Waste (EFW) technologies that would support the Community Energy Plan. Finalize the City s Green Procurement Policy: Explore bringing forward the Green Procurement Policy as part of the amendments to the Procurement Bylaw. Residential Develop an enhanced promotion and education program: Expand the current promotion and education program and focus on engagement and outreach strategies, which may include a range of opportunities such as: Enhancing the on-line local business Take It Back directory; Developing waste exchange programs enabling residents to donate and exchange reusable goods; Implementing incentive and reward programs; Introducing campaigns for targeted diversion or problematic materials causing contamination; Information promoting available Extended Producer Responsibilities (EPR) opportunities; Developing a waste application available to residents that will provide useful information about Guelph's collection schedules, notices and waste diversion opportunities; and, WSP Group Inc. 3

8 Using infographics to relay information. Re-instate the twice per year curbside yard waste collection service: City staff would develop a 2015 operating budget expansion for Council to consider re-instating the twice per year curbside yard waste collection service. Establish a food waste reduction campaign: Establish a food waste reduction campaign to promote reduction and avoid unnecessary waste generation and preserve resources associated with food production, packaging and transport. The campaign could introduce activities to help residents reduce and avoid unnecessary food waste such as purchasing food as needed, using leftovers, understanding due dates, etc. Similar campaigns are operating in the United Kingdom (Love Food, Hate Waste campaign) and the United States (Too Good to Waste campaign). Multi-residential Enhance and target promotion and education (P&E) campaigns for the multi-residential sector: City to launch an enhanced P&E campaign targeting the multi-residential sector. Activities may include: Enhancing the dedicated website for superintendents/property managers and tenants to explain the how, why, and what of waste diversion; P&E materials that can be printed and used in the building; and, Develop tool kits and handbooks. Develop an enhanced database for multi-residential properties: Continue to build a multiresidential database to manage and monitor multi-residential waste programs. Construction and Demolition Explore requirements as part of the permit process for new building construction and demolition (C&D) that would result in waste diversion: The City would explore a number of requirements as part of the permit process for new building construction and demolition that would result in waste diversion. May include: Municipal construction and demolition project must submit a waste diversion plan; Mandatory waste diversion targets for all new municipal construction, demolition and renovations; Mandate that all C&D materials associated with municipal construction must be diverted to a C&D recycling facility; Feebates in which buildings that achieve a certain waste diversion and other green targets receive rebates back from the municipality during construction; Establish policies such as fast tracking permits for achieving waste diversion targets during construction or issuing occupancy permit upon receipt of waste diversion invoices; and, Refundable deposit programs require that all construction projects (usually above a specified size) pay a deposit as part of the building permit. 2. Evaluation of Options Following the process to determine which items were advised to be forwarded as recommendations, a short list of 22 options remained for consideration by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee meeting on January 13, 2014, was structured to accomplish a specific goal of evaluating each of the options individually and independently. The ultimate purpose was to identify those options that would be in the best interest of the City and have the greatest impact on waste diversion or cost savings. WSP Group Inc. 4

9 2.1 Evaluation Criteria In order to accomplish the evaluation, the project team, in consultation with the City and the Steering Committee, developed a set of screening criteria for use during the Evaluation of Options discussion. There were five points used for the screening criteria. Effectiveness of Approach: includes the concept of proven results and is used in the context of how likely the option would produce expected results, such as increased participation or more diversion. A high score was expected to have demonstrated results or be considered effective, based on the experience of staff and the consultants. Community acceptance: meaning the degree to which the option is, or is perceived to be, something that will be well received in the community, which will include all affected members of the community: residential, multi-residential and IC&I. A high score means that the option is expected to be well received by all members of the community. Economically Feasible: consideration was given to both capital and operating costs (at a high conceptual level), considering those costs in relation to the other options. Where it is clear that the option will require a significant capital outlay, then it was scored in the lower range. If there is an ongoing operational cost component or contractual obligation that is not a major capital expense but has budget impact, this was scored in the medium range. Items that can be accommodated with minimum effort or cost were scored in the high range. Accessible to the Public: covers an assessment of general availability and ease of use to the general public. The option was weighed against current programs and determined if it would be likely to be more, or less, accessible than current programs. Ease of Implementation: referring to how the City would roll-out the option, either with current staff or the hiring of additional staff. In general, the easier it seems to be to implement, the higher the score. The January 13, 2014 Steering Committee meeting was a six hour session dedicated to option evaluation. Each option was screened by applying a ranking method whereby a score that corresponded to a rank of high, medium-high, medium, medium-low, and low was used. The scores assigned to each rank were: High = 5; Medium-high = 4; Medium = 3; Medium-low = 2; and, Low =1. The evaluation criteria of each option was scored and then summed to produce a final score for each option. The final score determined the priority order for the options. As the evaluation process consisted of five evaluation criteria points, the highest possible score that an option could achieve was twenty five (25) points and the lowest possible score was five (5) points as a score of zero was not used for any of the criteria. To determine whether the option progressed onto the short list, a threshold score needed to be developed. The Steering Committee determined that the threshold score would be twenty (20) although they chose to include one lower scored option that met a City mandate or goal. The process resulted in the list of options being reduced to twelve (12) options that the project team would quantify further in terms of their respective diversion potential and cost. 2.2 Short List of Options On the basis of the preliminary screening, twelve (12) options were forwarded for further evaluation as additional research was required. The main purpose of the added research was to further define cost and diversion potential associated with each option. WSP Group Inc. 5

10 Adopt municipal household disposal rate target: Establish a goal to reduce the residential annual waste disposal based on a weight or volume per capita; progress could be monitored against a fixed target. For example, Nova Scotia (300 kg/capita) and Alberta (500 kg/capita) use this approach. Outreach for residential waste minimization and diversion programs: Outreach uses tools that directly engage the resident in an action to foster and maintain waste reduction and diversion behavioural change. Examples of outreach activities may include: Community Animators, Green Teams, Master Composter or Recycler volunteers; Friendly best recycling neighbourhood challenges; and, Engaging the public with staff or volunteers at community events. Explore Public-Private Partnerships (P3) to increase waste diversion: Where opportunities present themselves, explore innovative waste diversion partnerships with the private sector or other municipalities. Potential benefits include promoting local innovation and stimulating a local green economy. For example, the City of Edmonton has a partnership with Greys Recycling in which Edmonton supplies paper from City facilities and Greys Recycling converts it back to paper, which the City then purchases. Implement a grasscycling program: Educate residents about the benefits of leaving grass clippings on the lawn. Benefits include reducing collection and processing requirements while maintaining resident soil quality. Remove grass clippings as an acceptable material that can be collected at the curb. Many other Ontario communities have similar policies including: Toronto, Markham, Oakville and Niagara Region. Develop waste diversion targets for municipally operated buildings: Lead by example and expand waste reduction and diversion programs for municipally operated buildings. For example, the City of Markham has taken a phased approach beginning with a goal of zero waste in its City Hall and Administration building. Transfer responsibility for public space waste collection throughout the City to Solid Waste Resources: Transfer responsibility and resources for waste collection in public spaces to Solid Waste Resources to support the goals of the SWMMP. Target areas would include City facilities, parks, outdoor spaces and transit stop locations, enabling expansion for recycling and organic diversion opportunities. Establish a formal policy requiring that any waste generated by City operations and contracts is transferred, processed or disposed through the Waste Resource Innovation Centre (e.g., construction and demolition materials, recyclables, shredded paper, clean fill, brush, and other materials acceptable for diversion). Internalize waste collection at all remaining City facilities (e.g. Victoria Road, West End, etc.). Outreach for multi-residential waste minimization and diversion programs: Develop outreach activities to encourage waste reduction and diversion at multi-residential properties. Examples of outreach programs may include: Establish a multi-residential waste diversion working group that includes property managers, superintendents, landlords, condominium owners, tenants and City staff to discuss challenges and solutions to increasing waste diversion; Employing students to go door-to-door to explain waste diversion; Provide training to property management, landlords, and superintendents on how to maximize waste reduction and diversion on their property; Ask residents and owners to sign a pledge and place sticker on door showing support for waste diversion; Establish property waste reduction challenges; Use trained volunteers as building champions or ambassadors to promote waste diversion; Request property owners and managers to develop waste management plans; and, Request property owners and managers to provide feedback to residents about waste diversion progress, such as a recycling barometer property initiatives or concerns about contamination, etc. WSP Group Inc. 6

11 Expand the development approval process to promote waste diversion in multi-residential properties: The goal is to ensure that new multi-residential properties are designed to facilitate threestream waste collection. Some Ontario communities with similar permitting processes include Toronto, Markham and Hamilton. To achieve this, the City review process may consider the following waste diversion opportunities: Formalize guidelines for the approval process that ensures waste diversion is as convenient as garbage (e.g., three chutes, automated separation equipment and on-floor sorting stations); and, Require deposits by New Building owners to ensure that an effective waste diversion program is established and maintained letters of credit are returned after two years. Explore expanding the type of collection services provided to multi-residential properties: Review types of collection service offered to multi-residential properties willing to source separate into three streams: organics, recycling and garbage. Implementation may require specialized vehicles to service medium and high density multi-residential properties, or a front-end bin cost recovery service for City operated facilities and other interested parties. City staff will bring forward a report to Council outlining recommendations and costs associated with expanding the type of collection service offered to multi-residential properties. Provide assistance to industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I) establishments: City staff to explore creative options to provide assistance to the IC&I sector to help them develop more effective waste diversion programs. Services may be provided through partnering opportunities, contracted services, funding from organizations, or on a cost recovery basis. For example, communities offering assistance to IC&I establishments include: Calgary (AB), Seattle (WA), Vancouver (BC) and Oakland (CA). Services may include: Developing waste reduction training and/or provide waste diversion consultation, such as in the case of the downtown area, or on an individual business basis; Developing a Green Business Recognition Program or support/partner with existing Community Business Recognition programs; Exploring a business case for conducting waste audits or waste audit planning and/or training; Establishing IC&I sector working groups on waste diversion; Supporting the development of Eco-Industrial zones or networks, where local businesses coordinate complementary exchanges of useful products and by-products to avoid waste and add value to their process; and, Enhanced/targeted P&E and outreach campaigns for business sector. Develop a construction and demolition (C&D) waste diversion strategy: Offer assistance to C&D businesses to promote and help them develop more effective waste diversion programs. For example, communities offering assistance to C&D businesses include: Seattle (WA), Vancouver (BC) and Chicago (IL). Services may include: Establishing on-site waste reduction and diversion programs; Developing waste reduction training and/or providing waste diversion consultations; Providing assistance to help educate contractors about waste diversion in green building design standards; and Establishing a C&D sector working group to facilitate discussions with C&D representatives to address common waste reduction and diversion challenges. Explore Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT): With this option, all or part of waste management costs are covered by a subscription rate rather than through taxes. PAYT encourages residents to diligently focus on waste reduction and diversion, and promotes a fair and equitable cost for the service received. Properties pay according to the amount of garbage set out for disposal as opposed to a flat rate. In 2012, 64 Ontario municipalities were using a PAYT system. The City could also examine a range of policies such as exploring a hybrid approach which might involve: Subscription rates based on the size or number of the garbage (grey) carts beyond the standard and invoiced similar to a utility; WSP Group Inc. 7

12 A tiered garbage rate system with preference to those properties that have implemented successful recycling and organic programs and meet waste diversion targets; PAYT also enables opportunities for properties interested in receiving specialized or preferential service levels, such as increased collection frequency, or staging containers so they are accessible for collection; and, PAYT also provides an opportunity to provide collection service to interested non-residential parties for a cost-recovery fee, such as, organics collection, or front end bin service. The waste diversion impacts and estimated costs for the short-list of options are summarized in Section 3. Research for the options included literature reviews, interviews and consulting with other Ontario municipalities. 3. Quantifying Option Impacts Each short listed waste diversion option has an associated diversion and/or effectiveness potential and cost. The reality is that each option has a range of diversion potential and cost depending on the complexity and success of implementation. It is important to note that the implementation of many waste diversion options is likely to occur over several years, with some options requiring substantial lead time for public notification, planning and preparation. For each option, consideration has been given to potential additional cost(s) associated with full implementation of the option. Costs have been divided into three areas: Operating cost excluding labour, which refers to implementation either using City resources or contracting out; Labour cost, which refers to staff employed directly by the City or contracting out; and, Capital cost, which refers to the purchase of new buildings or equipment. In addition to cost, the potential additional tonnage diverted has also been considered. While some options may include a staged approach, such as a feasibility study prior to implementation, the tonnage impact is an estimate of diversion at full implementation. For each option, the potential additional cost and potential additional tonnage diversion were rated using a three-point scale: Minor change to cost or diverted tonnage; Moderate change to additional cost or diverted tonnage; and, High additional cost or diverted tonnage. Table 1 shows the summary rating of each short-listed option for potential additional cost and potential additional tonnage. Following the table, further discussion is provided on the potential costs and diversion for each option. WSP Group Inc. 8

13 Table 1. Potential additional cost and diverted tonnage for short-listed waste diversion options. Further discussion of the cost and diversion ratings associated with each of the short-listed options is presented below. Adopt municipal household disposal rate target: Adopting a municipal household disposal rate target is expected to have a minor impact on the City s operating and labour costs. In terms of labour, minimal staff time will be required to research and develop an appropriate disposal rate target. Operating costs would be associated with the development of promotion and education material to educate Guelph citizens about the target. It is anticipated that information about the target would be included in existing items such as the website or the annual conservation calendar. Minor additional diversion is anticipated, mostly from programs other than recyclables, due to increased awareness. Outreach for residential waste minimization and diversion programs: Outreach for residential waste minimization and diversion programs will focus on single-family households and improve on the City s existing successes in this area. It is anticipated that this option will have a moderate impact on the City s operating and labour costs. Staff time would be used to develop and manage new outreach activities. Program-specific promotion and education materials may be required. A moderate increase in additional WSP Group Inc. 9

14 diversion is estimated, based on additional residential tonnage diverted through greater participation or improved sorting practices by residents. Explore Public-Private Partnerships (P3) to increase waste diversion: Public-Private Partnerships (P3) is not intended to necessarily be actively pursued by the City unless a suitable situation presents itself. The first step will be to develop a P3 business case, which would include estimates of any labour, operating or capital costs that would be required on the City s part. Potential additional diversion, including materials that would be affected (recyclables, C&D, IC&I materials), would also be explored as part of the business case. Depending on the partnerships available to the City, it is estimated that while operating and capital costs and efforts would be high, there is also a potential for a moderate increase in diversion. This increase would most likely be from non-residential sources, which is an area the City continues to explore. Implement a grasscycling program: Grasscycling would involve a minor increase in labour costs for staff to research and develop an appropriate grasscycling program for the City. As well, it is anticipated that there would be a minor impact to operating costs for new promotion and education material. This would likely be offset by reduced collection and processing costs, as the grass would not be required to be picked up or composted. A moderate increase in diversion tonnage is anticipated due to the grass clippings that would be diverted. Develop waste diversion targets for municipally operated buildings: Developing targets for municipal buildings is expected to involve moderate labour costs in the form of staff time to research, develop and implement appropriate targets. Implementation may also include a moderate outlay of operating costs, in the form of promotion and education materials to spread awareness among City employees, purchase of carts or suitable containers and labour to manage and collect the separated material. A moderate increase in additional tonnage diverted is expected as a result of this option. Transfer responsibility for public space waste collection throughout the City to Solid Waste Resources: There should be no additional operating expenditures for transferring waste collection to Solid Waste Resources as these services are currently budgeted by other departments. By consolidating all waste collection activities under one department, resources can be aligned while enabling expansion for recycling and organic diversion opportunities. This transfer would likely require additional staff time to set up public space recycling, but should provide some overall cost savings to the City. A moderate increase in diverted tonnage is anticipated due to improved diversion opportunities. Outreach for multi-residential diversion programs: The development and management of enhanced promotion and education and outreach activities for the multi-residential sector are expected to require additional staff time. Additional operating costs will be associated with development of new promotion and education material for existing buildings serviced by the City. These are anticipated to moderately increase operating and labour costs. As multi-residential diversion is generally lower than single-family diversion, a moderate increase in tonnage diverted should be achieved due to increased participation from residents. Expand the development approval process to promote waste diversion in multi-residential properties: A moderate increase in labour costs are expected for this option, as staff would need to develop and implement changes to the current development approval process. The additional tonnage diverted as a result of this option is estimated to be high, as future developments would likely have higher diversion due to improved waste programs, property management and resident awareness and ease of use for residents to divert materials within their property s infrastructure. Explore expanding the type of collection services provided to multi-residential properties: Expanding the type of collection services provided to multi-residential properties will likely require a high amount of additional labour and increased operating costs. Staff would need to develop, implement and manage additional collection services. Promotion and education materials, as well as, carts and in-unit recycling and food scrap containers will also be required at multi-residential buildings. Additional types of pick-ups at multi-residential buildings are expected to increase the cost of collection. In addition, the City may require a moderate additional capital cost outlay to provide additional collection vehicles and dedicated containers. As a result of these expenditures, a high additional amount of tonnage should be diverted as more multi-residential residents have access to recycling and organics programs. However, WSP Group Inc. 10

15 while the diverted tonnage may increase, the diversion rate is unlikely to change and the percentage recovery from multi-residential locations may initially be lower than from single-family households. Provide assistance to industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I) establishments: Providing assistance to the IC&I sector would likely require a moderate increase in labour costs for staff to develop, implement and manage additional services. Operating costs would increase moderately as new promotion and education materials would be required for IC&I establishments. The anticipated additional tonnage diverted is expected to be high. Although diversion impacts resulting from the implementation of this option do not directly impact residential diversion rates, this would help the City move further towards its zero waste goal. Develop a construction and demolition (C&D) waste diversion strategy: Developing a C&D waste diversion strategy would likely require a moderate increase in labour costs for staff to develop, implement and manage additional services. Operating costs would increase moderately as new promotion and education materials would be required for developers and other C&D generators. The anticipated additional tonnage diverted is anticipated to be moderate. Although diversion impacts resulting from the implementation of this option do not directly impact residential diversion rates, this would help the City move towards its zero waste goal. Explore Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT): Exploring PAYT would require moderate additional labour costs in the form of staff time to research and analyze potential program options. Identification of potential additional diversion, as well as any additional operating, labour or capital costs, associated with implementation, would be determined as part of the PAYT analysis. 4. Open House # 2 A second Open House for the SWMMP Review was delivered as part of the public engagement and consultation strategy employed for the SWMMP Review process. Previous public engagement and consultation activities included surveys, on-line feedback mechanisms, focus groups, an open house and Steering Committee input. Prior to Open House #2, the Guelph SWMMP consultation process had achieved approximately 670 points of contact, that were used to inform the process, including: A SWMMP specific telephone survey that reached 400 residents; A SWMMP specific on-line survey in which 209 Guelph citizens responded; A fall Open House attended by 28 people; comments received by Guelph staff from 12 residents via the SWMMP web site; and Four focus group sessions (one each single family and commercial/downtown, and two for multiresidential) in which 18 individuals in total attended. In addition to these points of contact, the Public Steering Committee has also provided input and advice to the City throughout the SWMMP Review process. There were also 495 visits made to the SWMMP webpage during the review process up until the end of March 2014, for the public to learn about the public engagement and consultation process. The second Open House, held on February 20th, 2014 at the Delta Hotel, was similar to the first Open House in that the session was a drop-in format. A detailed summary of the Open House is included in the Open House #2 Summary Report. The purpose of the Open House was to: Present the waste reduction and diversion options that were advised to be forwarded into recommendations; Present the twelve (12) short listed options for waste reduction and diversion; Present a high level rank of potential costs and additional tonnage diverted for each of the waste reduction and diversion options; Solicit input and feedback from the attendees; and, Inform Guelph residents about how they can participate in the study process. WSP Group Inc. 11

16 Storyboards were used to describe the initial sixteen (16) recommendations as well as the twelve (12) short-listed options. Over the course of the evening, at least fifteen (15) people attended, based on the Attendance List. Of these, ten (10) completed a Comment Sheet. Attendees at Open House #2 were asked to provide comment and feedback on the initial recommendations and the short listed options. On one of the final storyboards, attendees were asked to affix a coloured dot to the proposed actions presented on the boards that, in general, identify: Green: would like the City to move forward with the option; Yellow: the option is worth considering but represents a lower priority or should be acted on after priority options have been completed; and, Red: do not want the City to move forward with the option. Input was solicited using this dot system to indicate preferences. Figure 1, a photograph of the dot exercise story board at the end of the evening, shows the results of this exercise. Figure 1. Dot exercise from Open House # Moving Forward In the end, the overall feedback from attendees at Open House #2 did not result in the elimination of any of the initial recommendations or any of the twelve (12) short listed options. Instead, the feedback confirmed the support for the options by the Steering Committee and staff, and further that all recommendations and options should move forward for final consideration by the Public Steering Committee and the project team. Following Open House #2 the Steering Committee met with the project team to discuss the feedback and provide input into the priority and timing of the options that would be incorporated as recommendations into the 2014 SWMMP Final Report. WSP Group Inc. 12

17 One (1) additional option was re-evaluated based on the strong public support indicated on the surveys resulting in twenty-nine (29) recommendations. Investigate an additional public drop-off centre: Investigate an additional public drop-off centre at a location in the City to augment the current location at the Waste Resource Innovation Centre to improve customer service levels and accommodate growth in the City. Consider expanding household hazardous waste to include small quantity generator waste from businesses. Overall, the various components of the public engagement and stakeholder consultation process worked effectively to gain insight, direction and support to guide the development of future waste diversion strategies for the City of Guelph. In general, the residents and stakeholders that provided input into the process were forward thinking and expressed consciousness of environmental sustainability and fiscal responsibility. WSP Group Inc. 13

18 Appendix A Long List of Options WSP Group Inc. 14

19 The following list shows the initial long list of waste diversion opportunities that could possibly have been used to further increase and promote waste diversion in Guelph. General municipal policies and programs: 1. Promote "waste less" principles and policies 2. Enhanced green procurement strategy 3. Develop waste diversion targets for municipal buildings 4. Work with retail and food sector to implement alternative take out packaging 5. Expand the list of eligible curbside recycling materials 6. Conduct four season waste audit in single family and multi-residential sector 7. Expand materials collected at public drop off depot 8. Establish an art exchange centre 9. Establish a reuse centre at the public drop off depot 10. Review collection services provided to the multi-residential sector 11. Additional drop off centre 12. Host household hazardous waste events in the community 13. Expand household hazardous waste depot to accept small quantity generator waste from IC&I 14. Park and public space recycling enhancement 15. Downtown core public space recycling enhancement 16. Clear bags at drop off depot 17. Reduced or differential tipping fees for diverted materials 18. Dedicated disposal levy to support diversion 19. Ban of recyclables in the garbage 20. Drop-off or disposal bans 21. Explore disposal alternatives 22. Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) new equipment: double deck screen, new eddy current separator 23. Internalize all remaining city facility collection 24. Transfer all collection of waste and resources to Solid Waste Resources (e.g. parks, transit, etc) 25. New shredded paper contract for City to mandate material coming to the MRF 26. Expand recovery of unsorted material in transfer station - e.g. cardboard, wood, etc 27. Allow commercial haulers to bring loads of mixed film with cardboard Approaches Targeting Residential Programs: 1. Food waste reduction campaign 2. Develop a my waste app for cell phones 3. Implement neighbourhood waste diversion initiatives 4. Educate residents about sustainable procurement practices 5. Promote natural landscaping 6. Establish on-line business directories and waste exchanges 7. Curbside C&D waste collection 8. Mobile collection for hazardous waste and waste electronics 9. Curbside scrap metal collection and recycling 10. Curbside textile recovery 11. Curbside battery collection 12. Curbside waste electronic collection 13. Pay-as-you-throw and sustainable financing strategies 14. Clear bags and purchase tags for excess garbage if PAYT adopted 15. Provide support to burdened households if PAYT adopted 16. Customer reward programs 17. Increase or targeted education and promotion efforts 18. Feedback tools 19. Outreach (block leader programs, master training programs, green teams or canvassing) WSP Group Inc. 15

20 Approaches Targeting Multi-residential Programs: 1. Mandatory distribution of recycling education materials annually 2. Animators/ambassadors/champions 3. Feedback to tenants 4. Provide feedback to building property management about contamination and other problems 5. Outreach such as door-to-door pledges, door stickers, waste reduction challenges 6. Enhanced/targeted P&E campaigns for multi-residential sector 7. Develop enhanced multi-residential building database 8. Garbage chute closure by-law 9. Establish multi-residential waste diversion working group 10. Provide training to property management and superintendents 11. Establish dedicated multi-residential waste diversion web site 12. City hires a dedicated multi-residential staff to support multi-residential waste diversion 13. Pay-As-You-Throw for garbage 14. Two-tiered garbage rates with preference to recycling buildings 15. Recycling pledges for landlords and tenants 16. All new buildings must make waste diversion as convenient as garbage 17. Designated goods diversion (e.g. HHW, Electronics, Textiles) 18. Waste diversion plans 19. Waste diversion deposits for new buildings 20. Dedicated collections from multi-residential buildings Approaches Targeting C&D Waste: 1. Mandatory recycling targets for public sector construction, renovation and demolition projects 2. Mandatory recycling targets for private sector construction, renovation and demolition projects 3. Green building rebates 4. Establish a C&D recycling facility 5. Mandatory diversion of C&D materials to a recycling facility 6. C&D sector working group on waste diversion 7. Incentive program for achieving waste diversion targets 8. Establish job site recycling by-law 9. Differential tipping fees for C&D materials diverted at drop off depot 10. Mandatory waste diversion plans for construction and demolition projects 11. Refundable deposit programs 12. Green building technical assistance 13. City works with Habitat for Humanity to divert C&D waste 14. C&D waste exchange program Approached Targeting IC&I Waste: 1. Provide additional assistance to small businesses 2. Hire a dedicated staff to provide support for IC&I waste diversion 3. Take back programs by retailers 4. Develop a green business assistance and recognition program 5. Eco-labelling of shelves in retail and grocery stores 6. Enhanced/targeted P&E campaigns for business sector 7. Coordinate and host peer-to-peer meetings for business 8. Coordinate peer-to peer meeting for schools 9. City to provide waste diversion consultation for businesses and institutions 10. City establishes outreach programs targeting the business sector 11. City establishes a dedicated website and promotion for IC&I 12. City provides organics collection to schools for a cost-recovery fee 13. City provides collection services to residential buildings at the university for a cost recovery fee 14. Establish incentive for private haulers who bring organics to composting facility 15. City establishes mandatory food scrap diversion for targeted IC&I establishments WSP Group Inc. 16