Ann Arbor officials say millions needed to fund replacement of sinking drop-off recycling station
As one Ann Arbor official put it Monday night, perhaps "the major gorilla in the room" when talking about the city's solid waste budget is the city's drop-off recycling station.
On top of a projected solid waste deficit of more than $500,000 by 2017, the city hasn't yet found a way to budget for a multimillion-dollar replacement of the drop-off station on Ellsworth Road operated by nonprofit Recycle Ann Arbor.
Tom McMurtrie, Ann Arbor's solid waste coordinator, said it would take about $3 million to $5 million to replace the existing facility. He said the city is seeking partnerships — including county funding — to help finance the project. In theory, the city would pay about $2.2 million.
"The existing facility is built on a closed landfill and is sinking, literally," McMurtrie told members of the Ann Arbor City Council during a special work session.
"If you go there … you can see one corner of the building — the eastern corner — is down significantly from the rest of the building, and that's the corner that's built on the closed landfill."
McMurtrie said city officials don't know how long the existing facility will last before it fails, but engineers will be evaluating the problem soon to get a better estimate.
In addition to the drop-off station, McMurtrie said the city has several upcoming capital needs that are mandatory, including about $633,000 worth of work related to landfill groundwater management, $400,000 worth of stormwater controls needed at the compost center, and $150,000 worth of work related to methane gas recovery.
Sue McCormick
Sue McCormick, the city's public services administrator, said the city is continuing to seek partnerships to help fund replacement of the drop-off station, but progress is slow.
"In recent years, the county has been unable to make a commitment for funding of that magnitude, so we've been struggling really to come up with effective partnerships to replace the drop-off center, so that's an issue," she told council members.
McMurtrie noted the drop-off station used to be funded through the solid waste millage, but that's no longer the case. One of the reasons for that, he said, is that 60 percent of the users of the station are from outside of Ann Arbor.
Without solid waste millage funding, the station's hours were cut to three days a week and members of the public now pay a $3 entry fee to be able to drop off recyclables.
The drop-off station accepts regular recyclable items, as well as a wide variety of harder-to-recycle items such as computers, televisions, freon appliances and tires. The Recycle Ann Arbor website calls it "Washtenaw County’s most comprehensive recycling drop-off center."
Instead of replacing the drop-off station, McMurtrie said another option is to close it and promote existing alternative locations where various kinds of recyclables are accepted.
He provided the following list Monday night:
- Plastic bag recycling: Available in most grocery stores
- Rechargeable battery recycling: Available in many local stores
- Trash disposal & metal recycling: Available at Calvert’s on the west side of town
- Small quantity compost purchases: Small volumes are currently available for free Saturday mornings at the compost site in April & June. Two yards or more are available all the time at the compost site.
- Small quantity compost drop off: The city may choose to accept this at its compost site.
- Electronics recycling: Computers and TVs are currently recycled at the site. There are a few other options for residents, such as the one day recycling event that the AAPS holds each year. Michigan legislation now requires stores to take back computers and televisions, but the program is in its infancy and is primarily available for people purchasing a new computer or TV. The city could consider a special dropoff.
- Freon appliance recycling: The city would need to check to see what other private sector options are available.
- Styrofoam recycling: Not aware of any other options in the area
Mayor John Hieftje said he thought pursuing the drop-off station alternatives was "a good path." But he noted the city has a goal of moving toward zero waste, and so the drop-off station provides a service the city would like to continue.
If it is replaced, Hieftje said 60 percent of the funding for a new drop-off station should come from outside the city, given its user base.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
Cathie
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 6:18 p.m.
Good planning...
BobbyJohn
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 2:54 p.m.
I would assume that the corner of the building could be underpinned or have some type of support added for several thousands, and get a number of years more out of the building. the settling of a corner of a short building would have to be VERY severe to be a safety risk to occupants.
Patrick Haggood
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 3:13 a.m.
I thought to suggest for price comparison a CostCo building would about the same size; but apparently its a LOT bigger or they use much more expensive materials than is immediately apparent (their stores look like giant cinder block buildings) - this article suggests a price 4X the cost of the recycle center estimate. <a href="http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20061019/NEWS/61019008" rel='nofollow'>http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20061019/NEWS/61019008</a>
Ann English
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:40 p.m.
"Many local stores" take rechargeable batteries? That means nothing to me, except perhaps Home Depot, where I take curlyQ burned out lightbulbs. I can see how rechargeable batteries and the light bulbs both can be described as "toxics". What about recycling glass? Over the years, I've taken more glass to the drop-off station than any other material and for just a relatively short time had curbside pickup for it. I guess I'll look more closely at what my township offers regarding recycling glass.
justcary
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:19 p.m.
Calm down everyone, they'll work this out. First they have to enumerate the options. But I have to say that that facility is just a big metal shed. Why will it cost millions to rebuild, even if it is modernized a bit? Can anyone in the building trades comment?
Craig Lounsbury
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 1:40 a.m.
I agree that millions to replicate a steel shed is outlandish. I wonder if they are thinking bigger than a steel shed. Something with elevators, skylights and fountains perhaps?
81wolverine
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 9:04 p.m.
I don't get it - instead of spending $3-$5 million they don't have, why not lease a commercial facility long term? There are LOTS of vacant commercial facilities around town they could get for cheap. That would eliminate most of the big up-front cost and enable them to find a better location too (paved parking lot, no sinking building, larger). Then, if they miraculously come up with a big chunk of money down the road, they could offer to buy the facility or build a new one - whatever makes sense. Or is this just a dumb idea?
John B.
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:31 p.m.
Other than the Ellsworth Road facility, where should I drop off used motor oil?
Basic Bob
Thu, Jul 14, 2011 : 5:25 a.m.
The place where you buy new oil is the best. I store it until my next oil change, then make one trip to the store. Saves time, energy, and gasoline.
a2citizen
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:15 p.m.
How about at the facilities which your township provides.
Grand Marquis de Sade
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:01 p.m.
Most auto parts stores (O'Reilly, AutoZone, etc. will take used automotive fluids. There is typically no charge for this service.
15crown00
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:39 p.m.
put it in the mayors backyard.
Tony Livingston
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:38 p.m.
If this was rental property in Ann Arbor, they would have forced the owners to fix it long ago.
rs
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:13 p.m.
Its funny that privatized recycling firms in other communities thrive, when Ann Arbor tries to run a non-profit one, it fails miserably. This what happens when you have a city council trying to run a business they know nothing about. Privatize recycling. Do what smart homeowners when they have a project beyond their skills, hire a company with knowledge in the field. The city should find a recycling company, sign a multi-year contract and let them handle it instead of trying to rebuild their own recycling center than looses piles of cash.
Tom Whitaker
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:01 p.m.
@rs: The City has already completely privatized recycling--at least the profits. There is a private firm that operates the MRF (that we spent millions on upgrading for them), a private firm that "incentivizes" recycling (that we pay upwards of $200,000 a year to so they can turn around and sell our private information to other companies), and a non-profit company that collects the recycling (using trucks we purchase and maintain for them, as well as a facility where they can charge citizens to drop off materials). We've also just spent a fortune on upgrading the compost facility and equipment for another private contractor to profit from.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:07 p.m.
Why should we believe anything McCormick and McMurtrie tell us? It's always the same sob story and they're never held accountable.
abc
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:06 p.m.
It may have been possible to build over the closed landfill but the foundation would have had to be designed for that; say incorporating micropiles. However in the event of a building failure, such as this seems to be, one typically starts by determining if the design was flawed. In that case one could easily determine if the design took into account that the building could not rely on the non-load bearing soil directly below it. If the design is found to be wanting then that professional or their insurance may be responsible. If the design seems to take the local conditions into account then the builder is looked at to determine if it was built to the proper specifications. If he if found to have skimped then he or his insurance may be responsible. Both of these should be looked into BEFORE the city tear down the building and replace it at their cost. Buildings built properly should stand for decades, if not centuries. For historic perspective, much of lower Manhattan is built on a landfill... so is the Lincoln Memorial.
Craig Lounsbury
Thu, Jul 14, 2011 : 3:23 p.m.
I don't think you understood any of my points
abc
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 12:31 p.m.
In our reality…? Mr. Lounsbury, you seem to want to downplay the building while Mr. Stanton's characterization is that of a 'major gorilla in the room'. Let's agreed to prioritize it based on money. In the article it is said to be a multi-million dollar project and it is said to be needed because it is 'sinking, literally'. Who cares if it is a steel shed, a wood shed, or a cardboard shed. It is a building that apparently needs to be replaced at a multi-million dollar cost. The micropiles I mentioned would have cost far less. A building sinking into the swamp is not particularly useful so if we need a building, regardless if it I is a steel shed or a cathedral' it should not sink into the swamp.
Craig Lounsbury
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 1:38 a.m.
You make a valid point about micropiles. But in our reality here we are talking about a steel shed. I could be wrong but to incorporate micropiles for a steel shed over unstable soil seems unlikely to me. But I am willing to entertain the possibility.
Vivienne Armentrout
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:30 p.m.
It would be the final nail in the coffin for our citizen-initiated successful recycling efforts begun in the 1980s to close the drop-off station. McMurtrie's list would be followed by very few people and to end the drop-off station would result in a lot of potential recyclables being trashed or even dumped illegally. Ironic, isn't it, that this huge capital expense is being proposed as the city stopped supporting the actual operation of the drop-off center, which has been forced to shorten its hours? The county used to support the station, which was appropriate because it is indeed a regional service. Now that we are having lots of airtime spent on "collaboration", perhaps our city officials could ask the county to support this important facility again.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:09 p.m.
One reason is the administrative overhead that skims money off the top and uses it for pet projects and debt payments.
Basic Bob
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:03 p.m.
Tipping fees work for trash. You rarely hear of commercial dumps with financial problems. Not sure why ann arbor is unable to collect fees to pay for the operation.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:23 p.m.
There appears to be plenty of accountability for low level employees, many who no longer have jobs, and none for highly paid administrators and managers who still have theirs. And yes, Fraser got out with is pension and health care. His new job is working as Snyder's henchman and top EFM manager, a job he got thru crony political connections.
Silly Sally
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:35 p.m.
This seems to be another good example of over-reaching by city officials, the mayor included. Can't the corner of the barn be jacked up or otherwise repaired? It is done all the time for old homes instead of tearing them down. They are "proposing $400,000 in improvements to the landfill entrance off Platt Road, including security upgrades at the gate and moving the scale house.." Why should a cash-strapped city sepnd money to replace a functioning entrance at a dump? So silly, it is a dump, not the main entrance to UM's hospital. They could spend a few thousand at the drop-off station entrance and cover the mud with crushed rock, or even pave it, but that was never mentioned. THen, they want to spend hundreds of thousands for storm water control for unusually large storms. Other communities in the south have drop-off facilities at each school for newspapers and bottles, with a facility like the one at Ellsworth open once a week for larger items such as freon devices and such. Ann Arbor officials need to learn how not to spend money - they are broke.
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:33 p.m.
well said SS. except its possible that the building sinking problem can't easily be fixed if, if, if, its because the footings that bear the weight of the structure are resting on compactable trash.
Stephen Landes
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:11 p.m.
As Ann Arbor is such a forward-thinking city and so "green" we should make the drop off center a historic district -- after all, some day schools will bring bus loads of children to the dump to see "where it all started". With that designation in place we can be assured of several things: the existing building will be preserved, repairs will be done only in a manner consistent with the building's historic nature, and building inspectors will be on the spot for every minor alteration.
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:18 p.m.
Yeah for Silly Sally's observation. The schools should be the community center of each neighborhood. Do we do any research about how other communities are solving problems, or are we so intellectually arrogant to think only someone in Ann Arbor can solve our problems. Perhaps, there are other good ideas out there that can be adapted?
Awakened
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:34 p.m.
Non-profit also means "non-loss" outside of Ann Arbor. Let us introduce Council to the idea of "Self-funded."
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:06 p.m.
"If you go there … you can see one corner of the building — the eastern corner — is down significantly from the rest of the building, and that's the corner that's built on the closed landfill." So the building inspector didn't come out to inspect the footing trenchs with his tape measure and poking stick to discover they weren't down to undisturbed soil? My My how ever did that happen?
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:15 p.m.
Maybe we can do without those high priced engineers on the city staff who clearly dropped the ball on this one?
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:50 p.m.
To add to my point, this is negligent and/or incompetent. Footing requirements as part of the construction process have been in place for much longer than the building in question. The building should have never been constructed over buried trash. That is NOT a hind-site statement either.
xmo
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:04 p.m.
"the city hasn't yet found a way to budget for a multimillion-dollar replacement of the drop-off station" Why not laid-off the person who wrote a 12 page report on that "ILLEGAL" fence on the west side and use his money to fund this project? The city has a lot of people who do nothing but cause hardship to businesses and its residents. Lets get rid of them before we talk about raising taxes or laying off safety people! This is why you cannot be a mind numb robot when it comes to voting, you get a city council like ours!
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:51 p.m.
Once again, The "city "part of the report was THREE pages, the rest was info provided by the owner who knowingly twice broke the law. Ryan J Stanton, failed to tell us that in the original article and slipped the info in as a comment. Shame on Ryan J Stanton for spreading and promoting self serving misinformation.
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:37 a.m.
It would be very helpful if AnnArbor.com linked to the current financials of nonprofit Recycle Ann Arbor, and list which friends of the Mayor are paid by that organization.
a2grateful
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:06 a.m.
The major gorilla in the room is that only 40% of future use is devoted to the city, with 100% tax funding liability to city taxpayers. So sure, keep cutting our services, while you continue to give away our public safety, facilities, parks, general quality of life, and future solvency.
Tony Livingston
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:46 p.m.
I am with you on this. The city parks situation really irks me. They are open and heavily used by many out of city residents while we pay 100% of their upkeep. Ditto for the streets which are fully parked up by people coming into the city to work downtown or at the U while we pay to maintain them. If you have a place on the Old West Side like I do, you know that you cannot park near your own house during the work day because everyone under the sun comes in and parks there for free.
Colleen Hood
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:42 a.m.
It would be counter-productive to close the recylce station AND decrease trash pickup. No?