Ann Arbor officials responding to large increase in recyclables with $102,000 facility upgrade
A view from the new single-stream operation at the city's recycling center, located at 4150 Platt Road near Ellsworth.
Angela Cesere | AnnArbor.com
Ann Arbor's new single-stream recycling operation is exceeding expectations, city officials say. And it's going to take more upgrades to keep pace with the tons of materials pouring in.
The city plans to add a third incoming materials tipping door, relocate an outbound materials loading dock and upgrade the lighting system and fire suppression system.
"So it has taken off a little faster than what was anticipated," Mayor John Hieftje said as the City Council voted 10-0 Thursday night to spend $102,000 for additional improvements and processing changes at the Materials Recovery Facility at 4150 Platt Road.
Tom McMurtrie, the city's solid waste coordinator, lobbied the council to approve the upgrades under a contract with FCR LLC, operator of the city-owned facility for the past 15 years.
"The facility is very successful," McMurtrie said. "We're working two shifts a minimum of five days a week, sometimes seven days a week."
The city has invested nearly $5 million into the switch to single-stream this year.
McMurtrie gave a written report to council Thursday night that said the facility — a.k.a. the MRF — has experienced at least a 60 percent increase in tons above what was projected since the single-stream program started. He called that a good problem to have.
"We're making money on every ton that comes in," he said. "The way the system works is that we are getting 30 percent of the revenue that's generated from non-city tons above $54 a ton."
In the first four months under the new single-stream system, curbside residential recycling in Ann Arbor is up 17.3 percent from the previous year, McMurtrie said, while waste disposal is down 5.9 percent. He said the recycling rate has increased from 33.3 percent to 38.5 percent.
Total recyclable materials brought to the MRF, meanwhile, have more than doubled during the same four-month period, McMurtrie said.
"The numbers keep ramping up," he told council members.
McMurtrie said the revenue the city is collecting from the increased tonnages should offset the cost of making the additional upgrades over time. He also said it should decrease the seven-year payback rate on the single-stream project by about two and a half months.
McMurtrie explained the previous two-stream system had three tipping doors, and the hope was the new single-stream system would need only two. However, the facility has seen a significant increase in materials coming from the Toledo and Lansing areas under contracts with those cities, and now bottlenecks are causing excessive waits for recycling trucks.
Complicating the issue, McMurtrie said, is the fact that tonnages aren't delivered evenly over the day. More than half the material is usually delivered in the last few hours of the day, he said.
Reports show more than $31,000 of the additional money being poured into the facility will cover unanticipated costs related to the MRF's fire suppression sprinkler system.
Officials said the existing sprinkler system was in poorer condition than originally believed. And during the switch to the new single-stream system, contractors had to remove portions of the existing system that weren't anticipated, they said.
The original bid drawings for the fire suppression sprinkler system also were incomplete, city officials said, causing bids to be unrealistically low. They said the fire suppression company that completed the drawings went out of business shortly after bids were received.
FCR is contributing $5,000 toward the fire suppression portion of the project. City Council Member Stephen Kunselman, D-3rd Ward, asked McMurtrie why FCR was not contributing toward the cost of the tipping door or loading dock.
McMurtrie said if FCR were to chip in money for the loading dock or tipping door, the city would have to restructure its entire revenue sharing agreement.
"There's actually a building expansion going on right now that was originally planned for next spring," McMurtrie noted. "They moved that up and that expansion has broken ground. That is a $500,000 investment that FCR is making to this facility, so it's a partnership that's working both ways with them investing money as well as ourselves."
Under a separate resolution, the City Council approved a nearly $202,000 purchase of a new Volvo loader for the MRF and reimbursed FCR about $56,000 for baler repairs. The MRF's existing John Deere loader was purchased in 2003 and had clocked more than 20,000 hours of operation as of the end of September, city officials said.
In other action Thursday, the council approved the following:
• Purchase of $330,000 worth of salt to be used on city streets during the upcoming winter season. The Detroit Salt Co. was the low bidder at $48.25 per ton for 6,839.38 tons.
Last year, the city applied more than 4,882 tons of salt during the winter season. The city used 6,632 tons during the 2008-09 season, 8,500 tons during the 2007-08 season, 4,700 tons during the 2006-07 season, and 7,076 tons during the 2005-06 season.
• A resolution authorizing reimbursing the Downtown Development Authority for the city's share of utility improvements on South Division Street between William and Liberty streets. The city will cover $145,069 of the $375,817 project, which included 325 lineal feet of water main.
Through partnering with the DDA, an undersized and older water main was replaced with a new 12-inch main, which city officials said is adequately sized to enhance firefighting capabilities within the downtown area. Bids for the project were solicited by the DDA, and E.T. Mackenzie Co. was the lowest responsible bidder.
• A resolution to approve a $34,750 contract with Hooker/DeJong to prepare a strategic plan for the Ann Arbor Senior Center, a recommendation made by the city's Senior Center Task Force. About $16,949 of the cost is being covered by a grant from the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation, while $17,621 will come from the city.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529.
Comments
thomas h blaske
Mon, Nov 8, 2010 : 11:32 a.m.
maybe with these savings, somebodyu in city will come to their senses & provide for at least one curbside leaf pickup this fall
AlphaAlpha
Sat, Nov 6, 2010 : 8:47 p.m.
"Why does the A2 Senior Center need a strategic plan,and why does it cost so much for this? City Council seems to love to spend money on consultants,..." Consultants are a great ploy much of the time. Government officials can claim credit for successful initiatives, and yet blame the consultants in case of failures. It's a great scam for all parties involved, and often lucrative; many consulting companies hire retired gov officials as well, greasing the skids both ways, as it were. Once rarely used, consultants have a role, but today are way overused. Imagine government officials who could make basic decision by themselves.
johnnya2
Sat, Nov 6, 2010 : 4:45 p.m.
@townie "McMurtrie said the revenue the city is collecting from the increased tonnages should offset the cost of making the additional upgrades over time. He also said it should decrease the seven-year payback rate on the single-stream project by about two and a half months." That would suggest that the recycling program is on pace to pay for itself, AND if they add more capacity will pay for itself 2.5 months faster. But I guess YOU know more about it than anybody.
Jay Thomas
Sat, Nov 6, 2010 : 3:12 p.m.
Many Detroit suburbs have been putting loose paper, plastic and everything else in the same bin for a long time. While there are other towns only switching now at the same time (G.R., Canton), that's not high praise when A2 used to be the leader in recycling. My point about Hieftje stands. Ann Arborites can keep the two bins as souvenirs.;)
jns131
Sat, Nov 6, 2010 : 7:58 a.m.
An article I read about a convent in Montana set the stage for me to really look at what I was recycling and to keep asking myself, can this be recycled? 90% of the time it was. The nuns in Montana recycle everything and waste nothing including burying food scraps. This should be a starting point for everyone who recycles but isn't sure. We set out one bag a week ourselves and end up using an extra box for the recycle. Great news for Ann Arbors recycle operation.
Steve
Sat, Nov 6, 2010 : 6:39 a.m.
Mr. Thomas is incorrect in his statement about other communities doing single stream recycling for the last ten years. I've been in this business for 32 years and single stream recycling has only been available for the last year, Before that it was all duel stream in southeast Michigan so good job Ann Arbor for being one of the first single stream facilities in the state. That is why they are being used by several communities.
crayzee
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 11:23 p.m.
Personally, I never had a problem with cleaning and sorting before, to maximize the recyclability of the stuff I was putting in the bins, and I am completely on townie's side here. Is this really paying off where it counts, or just making everyone feel better? I would like to see the output data.
annarbor28
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 10:28 p.m.
"A resolution to approve a $34,750 contract with Hooker/DeJong to prepare a strategic plan for the Ann Arbor Senior Center, a recommendation made by the city's Senior Center Task Force. About $16,949 of the cost is being covered by a grant from the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation, while $17,621 will come from the city." Why does the A2 Senior Center need a strategic plan,and why does it cost so much for this? City Council seems to love to spend money on consultants, especially when the same council made a great effort to try to close the center down, when a relatively small sum was needed for it, especially in contrast to building a large unnecessary fountain, etc etc. Seniors have asked for a modest amount of support in the current center, and considering how much they have contributed in property taxes and other revenue over the years, I hope these consultants will not downsize the current center to a doghouse or eliminate it all together, as Council wanted to do last year.
genericreg
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 9:53 p.m.
"get their trucks loaded by 2:00pm and have to sit in line at the MRF for 1 to 2 hours to unload." all trucks probable running burning gas
AlphaAlpha
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 8:51 p.m.
"But you are correct, there is no data here or elsewhere to support the idea that recycling pays for itself. You are also correct that there is no evidence that this is a financially good idea..." Agreed, though it feels nice. Perhaps we could have some middle school (or high school) business or economics class run the numbers, to better determine the costs. Hopefully this concept is appropriate for one of our many classes to study. This would be in lieu of an expensive consultant's study. Also the option of trash to energy should be evaluated.
Lincoln8
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 7:06 p.m.
@townie, The way the weights are obtained for waste going to the landfill come from the scaled weight of the loaded trailers leaving the MRF. The drivers are wieghed and given documentation to take with them to the landfill. All the curb collection weights come from the route trucks being " weighed in". Hope this clears up somethings. I know this because I work for A2 Solid Waste.
Jay Thomas
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 6:34 p.m.
Too bad A2 didn't have single stream all along. Other MI communities got this right from the beginning. But then they didn't have our Mayor working on this since the late 80's (and who only figured it out a decade after the rest of the state). Consider all of the recyclables that ended up in the trash for this bad decision. Thanks Hieftje! You were a great chairman of Recyle Ann Arbor.;)
David Cahill
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 5:06 p.m.
I like the new system, too. The figures for Ann Arbor demonstrate another conservation law, like the law of conservation of energy: the "law of conservation of discards." The total amount discarded by a given household,and the city as a whole, is staying the same (is being "conserved"). However, more is being recycled, and less is being thrown in the trash.
Mick52
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 4:59 p.m.
Kudos to the city for a successful and profitable program.
Subroutine
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 4:56 p.m.
@townie My assumption was based on: "curbside residential recycling in Ann Arbor is up 17.3 percent from the previous year, McMurtrie said, while waste disposal is down 5.9 percent. He said the recycling rate has increased from 33.3 percent to 38.5 percent.". And also from my personal anecdotal evidence. But you are correct, there is no data here or elsewhere to support the idea that recycling pays for itself. You are also correct that there is no evidence that this is a financially good idea, since no output data is presented. But I like it anyway.
Steve
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 4:34 p.m.
This is great news for my drivers who start work at 5:30am and get their trucks loaded by 2:00pm and have to sit in line at the MRF for 1 to 2 hours to unload. We deliver 4 to 8 tons of recycling a day to this facility. It's a much longer drive for them but our customers love the increased list of recyclables and the ease of not sorting.
townie
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 4:15 p.m.
Wings19: On what figures in the article are you basing your assumption that "there is...more that is being recycled?" All of the data provided is input data, not output data. I think each citizen has a duty to keep an eye on government and demand accountability (and not just think positively). Again, I'm hopeful that this new system is successful, but none of the data provided so far allows me to conclude this. All you can really take from the article is that there's been an increase in gross material collected by the recycling trucks, that the MRF can't handle it all, and that we need to spend more money on processing equipment as a result. There is also no information on the market for the newly accepted recyclable material and whether the City is reaping the revenues anticipated. Therefore I don't understand how johnnya2 has concluded that recycling pays for itself. If so, why did we need to spend millions in solid waste millage money on this new system?
Subroutine
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 3:39 p.m.
@townie I agree that the post lacks sufficient data to support a complete analysis, as many posts do. However isn't it more productive to focus on the positives; that there is that much more that is being recycled?
johnnya2
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 3:29 p.m.
There is no way to anticipate the exact amount of what will happen when converting to a new system. Recycling pays for itself so it is not going to the "well", it is telling the city if you invest in this, you can get paid back faster and likely handle more in the future. I would bet if they could work a contract for a city to bring their recycling in the morning instead of at the end of the day it would make a HUGE increase in money for the city and maximize capacity.
townie
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 2:59 p.m.
Wouldn't it be nice, for a change, to have one municipal project that had ALL the costs included at the outset instead of this constant returning to the well for more? I agree with Barb that it's a no-brainer that the amount of material going into the recycling bins versus the trash bins was bound to increase, so no surprise there. What a number of people questioned at the time single-stream was implemented was how much of this new material arriving at the MRF would actually be recyclable and of that, how much would actually have a market. So using the figures given above, what portion of the 17.3 percent increase in materials sent to the MRF as "recyclable" material is actually coming back out into a dumpster to be landfilled (now with the added cost of sorting) because it turned out to be garbage after all? Does the reported decrease in landfilled material (garbage) cited include the MRF reject material or just what is taken directly to landfill from the curbside garabage trucks? How much material collected as "recyclable" from other communities ends up being landfilled at a cost to the City? Is this figure deducted from the revenues projected for selling the non-Ann Arbor material that IS recyclable? I truly want to believe in this new scheme, and I too am enjoying the convenience of the one bin, no sort system. However, it seems we only ever get half the story and half the numbers needed to make a complete analysis of the overall impact this is really making on the City, both financially and environmentally.
Subroutine
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 2:33 p.m.
The old bins are recyclable.
BernieP
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 2:29 p.m.
Any chance the recycling people will recycle our "old" pre-upgrade recycling bins? Ours sit idly in our parking lot.
Barb
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 2:17 p.m.
Shocking! People are recycling more when we give them a bigger bin and more options. Whodda thunk it? Now if we could only figure out a way to get people to produce less waste.... hmmm.
Subroutine
Fri, Nov 5, 2010 : 1:45 p.m.
I'm not surprised at this news. Since I received my new recycling can, I only have to take my cans out every other week. To put it another way, approximately fifty percent of what used to go in the trash at my house now gets recycled. I actually enjoy recycling now. It's amazing to me how much I used to throw in the trash that is recyclable.