AGENDA #4f
BUDGET WORKING PAPER
TO: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
FROM: Bruce Heflin, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Bi-weekly Collection of Vegetative Debris
DATE: April 2, 2003
REISSUED: MARCH 23, 2005
The following discussion relates to a possible change in scheduled collection of vegetative debris from weekly to bi-weekly service.
BACKGROUND
Prior to implementation of curbside residential refuse collection service over a two-year period starting in fiscal year 2000-01, we collected curbside vegetative debris as we had staff and equipment available after dispatching residential refuse crews on their regular routes. Our goal was to collect such material every two weeks on average. We often did not meet this goal, especially during periods of heavy workload or staff vacancies, and occasionally the collection cycle was four to five weeks. The relative infrequency and lack of predictability resulted in this service being the source of more citizen complaints received in our office than any other solid waste matter.
We presented budget working papers over several years in response to the Council’s interest in providing scheduled collections of vegetative debris. Given the costs identified with such a service change, we were unable to increase the service, either in terms of frequency of collections or certainty of schedules.
Upon implementation of curbside residential refuse service, we were able to provide routine collection of vegetative debris on a weekly basis. During the first year of conversion, we were able to collect residential vegetative debris on Thursdays for those whose garbage was collected on Mondays; for those whose collections were on Tuesdays, we were able to collect vegetative debris on Fridays. This same pattern continued for the remainder of the Town converted during the second year. We believe that this service level was possible because of the overall improvements in efficiency of residential collection service attributable to the conversion to weekly curbside service.
DISCUSSION
We have found that service complaints related to collection of vegetative debris have virtually disappeared since our service level has been established as once per week service on a known collection day. We formerly incurred considerable overtime costs associated with collection of such debris on Wednesdays and Saturdays when backlogs of yard material accumulated. Such overtime costs are negligible now. The exception relates to recent work necessary to collect the large quantities generated by the ice storm of December 4, 2002; we anticipate receipt of intergovernmental funding (FEMA) to cover those costs.
The service level of once weekly vegetative debris collections has remained relatively consistent, notwithstanding significant increases in the quantity of material placed at the curb for collection. For example, we anticipate an increase of about 30% in the current year relative to last fiscal year. The quantity of debris now represents about 23% of the total residential waste stream and we anticipate this rate will continue or could increase for at least the next several months. While much of this increase is undoubtedly related to the December ice storm, it represents a significant workload for our crews.
Throughout this period, we have attempted to differentiate collection of the material according to quantity; thus, the larger, less prepared piles have been collected by the company with whom we have contracted for that purpose (for which we will be reimbursed by FEMA). The smaller piles and cans and carts have been collected by our Solid Waste crews. They have managed to complete their routes most weeks on schedule, albeit with longer than normal workdays and without a huge amount of overtime.
Bi-weekly option for vegetative debris collection
Bi-weekly scheduled vegetative debris collection could be provided on a specific day of the week for all Town residences. Half of the Town would be collected one week, while the other half would be collected on the following week. Collection days could remain Thursdays and Fridays, or might be altered, depending on other factors, such as the schedule for residential garbage collection.
Making this change could be accomplished with our current staffing level, although it is not clear if we could complete all vegetative debris routes during times of high volume, such as at present. This is something we would probably not be able to predict with complete accuracy, but would need experience to determine. We note that vegetative debris volumes have varied greatly over the years, making this kind of analysis very speculative, at best.
It is unlikely that we could achieve any significant savings, though, through this change in service level. This is due to the fact that the only way to achieve cost reductions in Solid Waste Services is to either reduce the amount of waste delivered to the landfill, or to reduce the number of employees or trucks used. Collecting the same amount of material less frequently does not affect the amount delivered to the landfill, just the number of times it is delivered. There might be slight savings associated with fewer trips to the landfill, but there is the possibility that we would make more trips each day than we do now, especially during periods of heavy workload.
We do not believe we could achieve reductions in the number of crews needed to collect yard debris, as they are the same crews needed to collect residential garbage in the same week. While we could add collection days to the week for either garbage or yard debris, we could not do so and maintain the task system, which allows workers to complete set routes and be paid for a full work day, regardless of hours worked. This system, which has been in place for at least 20 years in the Town, is not only popular with our employees (allowing these lower paid employees to hold second jobs, for example), but it has been effective for the Town, as our productivity figures for our crews are excellent.
Making this change could initially delay the addition of a residential crew that we believe is currently needed. We believe, though, that such a delay would be only temporary. Projected workloads clearly indicate an imminent need for an additional crew, especially in terms of servicing the growth related to Meadowmont and infill growth in Parkside, the Erwin Road corridor and Southern Village. Our number of houses served has increased over 11% in the past three years, an increase of nearly 1200 homes. This increase has been absorbed to this point, but only by increasing workdays to the point that many days we barely complete our routes before the landfill closes.
Accordingly, an additional full residential service crew could better meet these increased demands more reliably than the marginal labor and equipment hours that would result from the decrease in vegetative waste collection service.
Issues
We believe there are some issues that the Council would need to consider about making this change.
We believe in order to achieve efficient collection and minimize appearance problems resulting from uncollected material, this option would likely require the following:
These changes would help to standardize collections and take away some of the unpredictability of the workload.
1. Carts/containers. Currently, a citizen may use any kind of hard-walled container in which to place yard material for collection, or place small, loose piles at the side of the street. Residents may purchase a vegetative debris container from the Town at our cost of $43 per container. Collections are much more efficient in the Town’s cart. To make collection most efficient, we could specify the kind of container that residents should use, or at least that they should use containers. This would constitute an additional cost for many residents. To not require containers and allow unprepared piles would compromise efficient collection and, in peak periods, make scheduled collection more problematic.
2. Placement of brush. We would recommend that we no longer allow placement of brush at the street at times other than collection days. Before scheduled collection, it was not uncommon for there to be piles of yard debris placed at the street for long periods of time. We found that brush piles grow larger as they remain at the curb for longer periods of time. This resulted in a significant number of complaints from residents about the appearance of the streets and also produced safety concerns for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. We believe these complaints would again result if loose piles were allowed, and would result if carts were left out, as there have been about garbage carts. We would recommend enforcing the same rules for yard debris containers as for garbage containers.
CONCLUSION
We do not recommend making a change in the yard debris collection program at this time.