March 5, 1999

TO:Works and Utilities Committee and Urban Environment and Development Committee

SUBJECT:Action taken by the Works and Utilities Committee at its meeting on January 13, 1999, regarding Harmonization of Service Levels for Waste and Recycling Collection

The Works and Utilities Committee at its meeting on January 13, 1999, again had before it a report (November 27, 1998) from the General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services, recommending, based on the comments received at an informal meeting of the Works and Utilities Committee held on November 25, 1998, to review the issues and options discussed in this report, that:

(1)existing service levels for waste and recycling collection be continued into 1999, except for harmonization of the following services, which are to be referred to North York Community Council for comments before consideration by the Works and Utilities Committee:

(a)effective April 1, 1999, on an interim basis, the North York Community Council area be provided with once-a-week garbage collection and bi-weekly recycling collection, with twice-a-week garbage collection retained from the last week of June to the last week of August at an estimated annual cost savings of $1.0 million; and

(b)effective April 1, 1999, optional rear and side yard collection service provided at an additional fee be terminated;

(2)effective January 2, 1999, rear and side yard collection service be provided at no direct charge to all residents in low density properties who, on the basis of a doctor's certificate, lack sufficient mobility to carry waste materials to curbside, and who do not live in a residence with a fully able person, at an estimated additional annual cost of $50,000.00;

(3)effective April 1, 1999, replacement blue and grey boxes be provided to residents at a charge of $5.00 per box for pick-up at service yard and Civic Centre locations, and that green boxes be replaced with grey boxes as required, at an estimated saving of $120,000.00 per year;

(4)medium and high density residential buildings receiving municipal bulklift collection service be required to rent bulklift garbage bins from the City, as a condition of receiving garbage and recycling collection service from the City, at a rental fee sufficient to offset the cost of both bulklift garbage bins and recycling containers, subject to a further report on implementation issues to be submitted within approximately six months; and

(5)staff undertake the evaluation of the options for service harmonization outlined in this report with respect to:

(a)frequency of garbage, recycling and yard waste collection for low density and medium density residential properties which receive curbside collection;

(b)the provision of blue bags and other recycling support services to high density residential properties which receive bulklift collection;

(c)the provision of waste management services to small commercial properties and institutional properties, including consideration of full cost recovery user fees; and

(d)the number of industrial properties where municipal collection is proposed to be terminated and the method of phase out;

and that a report be brought forward in approximately six months.

The Committee also had before it a communication (January 13, 1999) from the Ontario Waste Management Association expressing concerns with respect to the harmonization of service levels for waste and recycling collection, and the suggestion that the City begin to provide services already adequately and economically provided by private sector waste haulers; and requesting that the Committee not approve this item at this time.

The following persons appeared before the Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Ms. Nancy Porteous-Koehle, Canadian Waste Services Inc.;

-Councillors John Adams, Midtown;

-Councillor Mario Giansante, Kingsway - Humber;

-Councillor Doug Holyday, Markland - Centennial;

-Councillor George Mammoliti, North York Humber; and

-Councillor Howard Moscoe, North York Spadina.

The Committee:

(1)deferred consideration of Recommendations Nos. (1) to (4) of the aforementioned report, with Recommendation No. (4) amended to read as follows, pending consideration of the harmonization of services by City Council and the proposed strategic planning session being arranged by the Chief Administrative Officer for Members of Council:

"(4)medium and high density residential buildings receiving municipal bulklift collection service be required to rent bulklift garbage bins from the City, as a condition of receiving garbage and recycling collection service from the City, and that a rental fee for the bulk lift garbage bins be established sufficient to offset the cost of both bulklift garbage bins and recycling containers, subject to a further report on implementation issues to be submitted within approximately six months;"

(2)adopted Recommendation No. (5), amended as follows, with the direction that the report requested therein be submitted to the Committee for consideration at that time:

"(5)staff undertake the evaluation of the options for service harmonization outlined in this report with respect to:

(a)frequency of garbage, recycling and yard waste collection for low density and medium density residential properties which receive curbside collection;

(b)the provision of blue bags and other recycling support services to high density residential properties which receive bulklift collection;

(c)the provision of waste management services to small commercial properties and institutional properties, including consideration of full cost recovery user fees; and requests for proposals to the waste-hauling industry regarding the collection of industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) waste;

(d)the number of industrial properties where municipal collection is proposed to be terminated and the method of phase out;

(e)an analysis of the 3Rs pilot projects which were conducted; and

(f)options concerning recycling, in consultation with the Toronto 3Rs Sub-Committee;

and that a report be brought forward in approximately six months"; and

(3)requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to submit a report to the Committee on a strategy to make replacement boxes available to those who are unable to pick them up at designated locations, with delivery on a cost-recovery basis.

City Clerk

Trudy Perrin/es.

November 27, 1998

To:Works and Utilities Committee

From:Angelos Bacopoulos

General Manager - Solid Waste Management Services

Subject:Harmonization of Service Levels for Waste and Recycling Collection

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to outline the range of proposed options related to the harmonization of service levels for waste and recycling collection, to provide, where possible, a preliminary assessment of the impacts of each option, to identify the additional data collection and analysis necessary to evaluate the options, and to seek direction from the Committee with respect to the proposed options and scope of further work.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Where adequate information is presently available, a preliminary estimate of the financial impact of proposed service level changes is included in this report. A more precise and complete estimate of the financial impact of service level changes can only be determined by conducting the surveys and analysis outlined in this report. A complete financial assessment will be included in a further report which is proposed to be submitted, in approximately six months.

The financial impact of extending rear and side yard collection service to qualifying disabled residents across the City is estimated at $50,000.00 per year. The financial impact of charging $5.00 for replacement recycling boxes is projected to reduce net costs by $120,000.00 per year. The financial impact of limiting twice per week garbage collection to 10 weeks in the summer and moving to bi-weekly recycling in North York, is projected to reduce costs by $1.0 million per year.

Recommendations:

Based on the comments received at an informal meeting of the Works and Utilities Committee held on November 25, 1998 to review the issues and options discussed in this report, it is recommended that:

(1)Existing service levels for waste and recycling collection be continued into 1999, except for harmonization of the following services, which are to be referred to North York Community Council for comments before consideration by the Works and Utilities Committee:

(a)Effective April 1, 1999, on an interim basis, the North York Community Council Area be provided with once a week garbage collection and bi-weekly recycling collection, with twice a week garbage collection retained from the last week of June to the last week of August at an estimated annual cost savings of $1.0 million;

(b)Effective April 1, 1999, optional rear and side yard collection service provided at an additional fee be terminated;

(2)Effective January 2, 1999, rear and sideyard collection service be provided at no direct charge to all residents in low density properties who, on the basis of a doctor's certificate, lack sufficient mobility to carry waste materials to curbside, and who do not live in a residence with a fully able person, at an estimated additional annual cost of $50,000;

(3)Effective April 1, 1999, replacement blue and grey boxes be provided to residents at a charge of $5.00 per box for pick-up at service yard and Civic Centre locations, and that green boxes be replaced with grey boxes as required, at an estimated saving of $120,000.00 per year;

(4)Medium and high density residential buildings receiving municipal bulklift collection service be required to rent bulklift garbage bins from the City, as a condition of receiving garbage and recycling collection service from the City, at a rental fee sufficient to offset the cost of both bulklift garbage bins and recycling containers, subject to a further report on implementation issues to be submitted within approximately six months.

(5)Staff undertake the evaluation of the options for service harmonization outlined in this report with respect to:

(a)frequency of garbage, recycling and yard waste collection for low density and medium density residential properties which receive curbside collection;

(b)the provision of blue bags and other recycling support services to high density residential properties which receive bulklift collection;

(d)the provision of waste management services to small commercial properties and institutional properties, including consideration of full cost recovery user fees;

(e)the number of industrial properties where municipal collection is proposed to be terminated and the method of phase out;

and that a report be brought forward in approximately six months.

Executive Summary:

Many variations exist among the former area municipalities with respect to the provision of waste and recycling collection services to low and medium density residential properties, small commercial properties, institutional properties and a small number of industrial properties. These variations consist mostly of differences in frequency and seasonal duration of services and, in the particular case of medium density residential, small commercial and institutional properties, eligibility for services.

This report identifies areas where collection services across the City require harmonization, proposes harmonization options that should be considered, and provides a preliminary evaluation of the options, including cost impacts, where feasible. The specific areas considered in the report are as follows:

A.Residential Collection Service

1.Curbside service for low density properties.

(i)Garbage and recycling collection.

(ii)Yard waste collection.

(iii)Rear and side yard collection.

(iv)Provision of recycling boxes.

2.Curbside services for medium density multi-unit residences.

3.Bulk lift services for high density residences.

(i)Provision of bulk lift bins.

(ii)Recycling program support in apartment buildings.

B.Small Commercial Collection Service

C.Institutional Collection Service

D.Industrial Collection Service

The report makes recommendations in areas that do not require further analysis and provides a methodology for evaluating options related to frequency of residential waste collection and eligibility criteria for, and frequency of, commercial and institutional waste collection.

Recommendations are presented with respect to the frequency of curbside garbage and recycling collection in the North York Community Council Area, provision of replacement recycling boxes, provision of rear and side yard collection services and rental of bulklift garbage bins to apartment buildings.

The remaining harmonization options for residential, small commercial and institutional properties will be evaluated through additional data collection and analysis as outlined in this report with a further report to be submitted in approximately six months providing the service, operational, environmental and financial implications of each option. The further report will include:

(a)an analysis of options related to the frequency of residential curbside waste, yard waste and recyclables collection on a City wide basis;

(b)an analysis related to the frequency of an eligibility criteria for commercial and institutional waste collection;

(c)consideration of service fees for small commercial properties and institutional properties;

(d)an examination of implementation issues related to harmonized services, particularly with respect to phasing options, collection system redesign requirements and organizational restructuring implications; and

(e)the number and type of the few industrial properties that would be affected by the proposed termination of existing service, as well as a proposed method of phasing out service.

It is intended that the further report will provide the basis for consultation with various stakeholder groups prior to decisions being taken by Committee and Council, and a proposal for this consultation process will also be included in the report.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Chief Administrative Officer has requested a report to the Works & Utilities Committee on waste management service harmonization.

An informal meeting of the Works and Utilities Committee was held on November 25, 1998 to review the issues and options discussed in this report, and the recommendations presented are based on input received at that meeting.

Discussion:

For the purpose of this report and ensuing evaluations, classes of properties are divided into four principal groups: residential, commercial, institutional and industrial. For reference purposes, the gross 1998 Solid Waste Management Services Division budget is $135.1 million and the net budget is $76.3 million.

A.Residential Collection Service Level Variations

Waste and recycling collection services to the residential sector comprise the main activities of the Solid Waste Management Services Division. There are three categories within the residential class of properties:

Clow density properties, collected at curbside;

Cmedium density properties, collected at curbside or in rear-bin containers; and,

Cmedium and high density properties, collected in bulklift containers where suitable facilities exist.

The basic service levels for each of the former area municipalities for these residential property categories are shown in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, there have been service level variations among former area municipalities in the provision of curbside residential collection with respect to the frequency of collection, the duration of collection during the year for some types of waste and services provided to particular groups of residences. The most consistent level of service is provided to highrise apartment buildings, where all former area municipalities contracted for bulklift collection. Service variations are described in more detail in the following sections dealing with each category of property.

Table 1

Residential Garbage and Recycling Collection Frequency in the

Former Area Municipalities

Former Area Municipality		Low Density Properties (curbside service)		Medium Density Properties (curbside & rear bin service)		Medium and High Density (Bulklift)
East York		Once-a-week garbage; Bi-weekly recycling		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling, depending on generation		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling
Etobicoke		Once-a-week garbage; Bi-weekly recycling		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling for properties of 3 units and greater		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling
North York		Twice-a-week garbage; Once-a-week recycling		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling for all properties		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling
Scarborough		Once-a-week garbage; Bi-weekly recycling		Once-a-week garbage; bi-weekly recycling		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling
Toronto Alternating		Once-a-week garbage; Bi-weekly recycling; Twice-a-week summer garbage for 50,000 residences		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling for properties greater than 7 units		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling
York		Once-a-week garbage; Bi-weekly recycling		Once-a-week garbage and bi-weekly recycling, except for larger apartments without bulk-lift facilities which receive twice-a-week garbage and once-a-week recycling.		Twice-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling

A1.Curbside Collection Service for Low Density Residential Properties

Low density residential properties include single family residences and properties with a small number of units such as townhouses and duplexes fronting on streets. Details of the service for each former area municipality are shown in Table 2.

Table 2

Garbage, Recycling and Yard Waste Service Levels for

Low Density Residential Properties

(i)Garbage and Recycling Collection Services

As shown in Table 2, the predominant service level is year-round once-a-week garbage collection and alternating weekly or bi-weekly recycling collection. The exceptions are the former City of North York which has provided year-round twice-a-week garbage collection and weekly recycling collection, and approximately 50,000 residences in the former City of Toronto which receive summer twice-a-week garbage collection from the last full week of June to August 31. Generally, these residences in the former City of Toronto are in areas with the highest concentration of generation of garbage.

Based on the range of existing service levels, the harmonized service options for garbage and recycling collection to low density residential properties include:

(1) year-round once-a-week garbage collection and alternating weekly or every other week recycling collection with;

(a)no summer twice-a-week garbage collection (estimated cost saving of $1.8 million per year);

(b) summer twice-a-week garbage collection in areas of high generation throughout the new City (cost impact to be determined);

(c)summer twice per week collection retained in areas that currently receive this service and in the York Community Council Area (estimated cost saving of $1.0 million per year): North

(d)City wide summer twice-a-week garbage collection for all areas of the new City (estimated cost increase of $1.4 million, net of the savings from ending year-round twice-a-week collection in North York); or

(2) year round twice-a-week garbage collection and weekly recycling collection (estimated cost increase of $7.0 million per year).

Service and Operational Impacts of Options:

The former area municipalities and Metropolitan Toronto introduced recycling programs in the late 1980's. As a result, garbage quantities were reduced, but costs also increased significantly. In response, all former municipalities, with the exception of North York, introduced once-a-week collection and alternating weekly or bi-weekly recycling collection in order to reduce costs. In most areas residents have adjusted with minimal complaint to the provision of once-a-week garbage collection.

After changing to once-a-week collection, the former City of Toronto adopted a policy of twice-a-week summer garbage collection in neighbourhoods where houses are closer together and lack space for garbage storage. The greater density results in greater concentrations of garbage which can generate unpleasant odours during the summer months. Approximately one-third of residences in the former City of Toronto are eligible for this service which is provided from the last full week of June to August 31. The additional service is based on defined need criteria. As a result of the introduction of this summer service, it was possible to retain once-a-week collection for the balance of the year with cost savings relative to the former year round twice-a-week collection.

To determine the need for this summer service, the former City of Toronto conducted an analysis of the garbage generation in collection areas in relation to net lot area, street frontage, and the number of properties in the collection area. A ranking of the collection areas according to the concentration of garbage was provided from this analysis and the former Toronto City Council used this information to decide on the areas of the former City where this service should be provided. Twice-a-week summer collection began in the former City of Toronto in 1996.

Summer twice-a-week collection was evaluated after the first summer of operation. The results of statistically valid surveys indicated that participation rates, defined as the frequency with which residents used both collection days of the week, averaged 47 percent. As well, for reasons that are not apparent, areas that generated the highest amount of garbage were less likely to participate on both collection days.

If summer twice-a-week collection is retained, there are a number of factors that will affect the cost. First, the cost will depend on the number of collection areas provided with this service and whether the collection areas are clustered or scattered. Another consideration will be the number of additional trucks which will have to be purchased to provide summer twice-a-week collection. It would be necessary to incur a large capital expenditure in the year in which it is decided to extend this service to a large area of the City (the preliminary estimate of an additional $1.4 million to extend this service City wide includes the amortization of these capital costs). Furthermore, in the former City of Toronto, where in effect option (1.b) has been adopted, it has been necessary to print an additional summer collection calendar to reduce confusion by residents concerning the correct collection day for different materials. As well, some former area municipalities such as Scarborough are experimenting with the use of a four-day work week, which may result in reduced collection costs for once-a-week garbage collection. If summer twice-a-week collection is adopted in these areas, it will be necessary to return to a five-day work week during the summer months. Finally, if the service is extended to areas of the City where curbside collection is contracted, there would be additional cost implications if there is a need to negotiate with contractors during the term of these contracts.

The current regulation under the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) requires that recycling collection occur at one half the frequency of garbage collection. In the former City of Toronto, when summer twice-a-week garbage collection is provided, recycling collection continues to be provided on an alternating weekly basis, or at one-fourth rather than at one-half of the frequency of garbage collection service. Ministry of Environment staff have confirmed that this practice does not appear to conflict with the EPA regulation.

With respect to Option (2), in which garbage collection is provided twice-a-week year-round, the existing regulation would require provision of once-a-week recycling year-round. However, the Ministry of the Environment's (MOE) recent consultation paper dated June 2, 1998 entitled "Draft Regulation - General - Waste Management", promulgated under the EPA, proposes that only bi-weekly recycling collection will be required under provincial regulations regardless of the frequency of garbage collection. If this regulation is adopted it would permit provision of bi-weekly or alternating weekly recycling collection in conjunction with year-round twice-a-week garbage collection.

Environmental and Waste Diversion Impacts of Options:

The environmental impacts associated with the operation of waste collection vehicles include: the impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from vehicle operation; the human health impacts associated with smog resulting from vehicle emissions; the impacts of these emissions on other animals and plants; the health and safety impacts on the public from the operation of collection vehicles on City streets; and the health and safety impacts on workers collecting waste materials. Generally these impacts will be reduced if the frequency of collection is reduced as a result of reduced travel distance and vehicle operating time. Table 3 shows a comparison of the environmental and cost impacts of Options (1.a), (1.d) and (2) described above.

Table 3

Environmental and Cost Impacts of Alternative Garbage Collection Systems