Curbside Collection Consultation - Electoral Area Residents

Hi there,

Thanks for your questions.

For the finished compost, while none is available just yet, the plan is to sell it publicly, but also provide it as a donation and at a discount for food security initiatives, to partner municipalities, and to residents who have curbside services. The sale of compost is not expected to recover the costs of operating the composting facilities nor the collections service, therefore, some costs must come from the users of the system.

Backyard composting is great if done properly, and the RDCK fully supports residents in backyard composting. These services can augment that system by accepting things like meats, bones, fats, cooked food, grains, dairy and soiled paper – not typical items for backyard composters.

Bi-weekly garbage collection is the standard across most municipalities and regional districts in BC. With weekly collection of food wastes, most, if not all of the material that generates smell and makes storage of garbage difficult should be removed, therefore making it possible to keep waste indoors. Most rural properties likely have a shed of some sort, or at least the space to site one, and as residents are already managing their waste with wildlife in mind, this kind of system wouldn’t change the amount of waste created, just provide options for easier separation of wastes and recyclable/compostable items. With clean recycling, weekly food waste collection, and reduced garbage, these logistics can be met with some troubleshooting, and should services go ahead, the RDCK would provide residents with resources and information, including solutions for some of the challenges you raise.

Regarding wildlife, we’d like to refer you to other questions asking about this (bin types and locks), as well as more information on the project page, and the Organic Waste Diversion Program (support keeping smells down, storage ideas).

Some additional information regarding collection frequencies, and costs:

• A given collection vehicle can at most collect 2 streams of waste at a time. These types of vehicles are called split-packers. So one week, the truck would collection food waste and garbage, the next it would collection food waste and recycling.
• The cost is for all three streams of waste, and residents would not be able to opt out of one or the other. It would be an annual cost.  All household would be charged the same amount.
• Existing haulers and service providers would be encouraged to participate in a competitive procurement process, should services go ahead in a given area. Companies like GFL and Waste Management are large, national companies and are likely not at risk of going out of business from a change to local contracts. To support smaller, local haulers, the RDCK has provided a flexible service model proposal, which allows for operators without split-packers/large vehicles to be able to participate in the competitive bidding process.
• Recycling is actually sort of cost-neutral in the proposal, as RecycleBC, who currently provides curbside recycling free of charge to some residents in the Electoral Areas, provides partner organizations a “cost incentive” for administering curbside collection services. Residents who already receive this service would not be charged for this aspect of the service, and could potentially see an annual cost at less than what those who do not have recycling services might receive.

We apologize for the delayed response – these answers take some time, and with the Easter Holiday, staff were less available to provide responses. Thank you for your participation in this consultation. 

Hi there, 

In the curbside collection proposal for Electoral Areas, we are looking at weekly food waste collection, and bi-weekly garbage and recycling. Typically when food wastes are removed from people's garbage, garbage pick-up every 2 weeks is enough as food waste makes up the bulk of the weight and the reasons for smells etc.. Bag limits have not been decided - this would be part of the service establishment bylaw development - which will only occur if the proposal is supported through this consultation.
If you currently receive curbside collection, and this proposal went through (i.e. was voted in favour through a referendum), the services would go to a competitive bidding process. The awarded service provider would then provide the expanded service, but through a contract with the RDCK. This is all hypothetical and uncertain of course, and subject to that competitive bidding process. If it went ahead, there would be no option to opt-out, at this time. 

Wildlife is certainly a big issue. The RDCK would be providing food waste containers that have a metal locking mechanism that secures the lid from being opened if the bin is tipped over. These types of locking mechanisms are used by the City of Port Coquitlam. You can see how they use them here. You would still need to store your waste somewhere secure, like you currently do to prevent animals from accessing it. With this proposed service, you would have the same waste, just a new system for separating it and having it collected. Please make sure you've filled out a survey to let us know if you do or do not support this proposal. We are grateful for all responses and feedback, and are taking everyone's concerns into consideration. 

Thanks for your questions, 

Hi, thanks for your questions, sorry we missed you before. We've answered your questions below. 

1. Residents would continue to store their waste somewhere secure, as the curbside collection service would not be creating new waste, just a new way to separate it from garbage and have it collected. The food waste carts the RDCK would provide would have a metal bar that secures the lid to prevent it from opening if it was tipped over.  Similar systems are used by the City of Port Coquitlam - learn more here. That being said, the bins would still need to be kept somewhere secure so they are not dragged away by bears.

2. Residents with longer driveways might need to take their bins to a public road using a vehicle. The bins the RDCK would provide should be small enough to fit into a regular car, or be light enough for most people to lift and/or wheel them to where they get collected. For people with mobility challenges, this may be difficult, and further support may be needed. For people who are currently self-hauling their waste, having to transport waste to the end of a driveway might actually be easier than having to take it to a transfer station or landfill.

3. As the food waste is collected weekly, and the material taken off-site to be turned into compost at RDCK facilities, there may be less animal attractive material sitting in people’s yards (as this material in backyard composters can attract bears, skunks, rats, and raccoons). If residents use the locking mechanisms properly, keep their containers clean, store them somewhere secure, and use the weekly service, wildlife issues might not get worse, and in some cases, may improve. The RDCK is committed to ensuring that if this service were to proceed, it would be compliant with WildSafe BC Best Practices, and have the input of experts to mitigate wildlife conflicts. In communities with high bear populations, when implemented properly, curbside collection services can actually reduce human/bear conflict. It is a major concern and priority to address these issues.

We will note that rural curbside collection services currently exist in many BC communities that have long winters, lots of wildlife, and dispersed populations, and solutions for all of the concerns mentioned have been found. If it went ahead, we would work to deliver quality, safe, and reliable services.

 Please make sure you have completed the survey on curbside collection to formally submit your position on this proposal into the consultation. The service will not go ahead if it is not supported by residents in a given Electoral Area. 

Thanks,

Hi there, thanks for your questions, 

The finished compost produced at the RDCK facilities will be a Class A compost available for commercial and residential use in gardens, farms, and landscaping applications. Once available the compost will be available for anyone to purchase. Pricing and method of sales are still being developed. Currently there is no compost available for sale or distribution, as programs have not been running for long enough to generate a supply. The RDCK is looking at providing compost at discounts to food security organizations and for those who receive curbside collection services. As well, farms have been identified as benefiting from discounts, and we are exploring ways to ensure equitable access to this soil amendment. 

Grass and leaves will continue to be disposed of as normal –  at transfer stations and landfills with free drop-off months in the spring and fall. Yard and garden waste that does not need to be chipped can also be put in the organics self-haul bins along with food wastes etc.. Exact details on how best to use a curbside collection service for yard and garden materials will vary from area to area, as the specifications of bins size and type will vary depending on the methods of service delivery – to be determined only if this proposal is supported and goes to a referendum. Let us know if you have any other questions!

Cheers, 

RDCK Resource Recovery

Hi there, 

There is no intention to close any of the Transfer Stations as part of this proposed service.
Please contact organics@rdck.ca or rrdept@rdck.ca for support in identifying your household as within or outside the potential service area boundary. Note that even if you don't see your exact address, but your property/household is within the green background, your household can be considered as "feasible" based on these draft maps. 

Hi,

Homes that currently receive recycling in the RDCK are serviced directly by RecycleBC (who contract haulers) and are not charged for the service. The RDCK would likely not replace this direct service from RecycleBC, therefor the cost for adding garbage and organics collection would likely be pro-rated (reduced) for these residents. However all of this is highly speculative as we don't yet know if support for the proposal in principle or willingness to pay for the service is sufficient to proceed with further planning for the establishment of services. Bottom line though, the RDCK would not double charge residents for services. 

Thanks for your question

Hi there,

Thanks for your great question. The RDCK understands that not all residents will be able to easily get their waste to the curb if this project were to go ahead. We would be happy to have a conversation with you and anyone who is interested to support access to recycling and waste services. Personal assistance is not something we have considered at this time, but if the consultation indicates general support for the program, the RDCK may need to undertake additional engagement on this topic with residents prior to service establishment.

Hi, 

The finished compost is intended to be provided as a for-sale product to residents. Discounts and exact methods of providing compost back to residents who participate in curbside collection services are still being developed, and may vary by municipality and Electoral Area. The RDCK has committed to providing equitable access to the finished compost and will be developing a plan for compost sales, including cost and sale locations, later this year. If EA residents are interested in use of compost from RDCK facilities, they are encouraged to include that information in the survey.

Hi there, 

The detailed cost breakdown for each stream of waste is somewhat complicated, but here is a summary for the three streams of waste being proposed for curbside collection:

Garbage: The cost is based on a fixed collection fee per household per year based on frequency of collection (bi-weekly), the tipping fee for mixed waste ($137.5/tonne) multiplied by average kg per household per year, the cost of a garbage bin amortized over its lifespan, program overhead (staffing, education, etc.), and a contingency (20%). 

Food Waste: The cost is the same, however the cost for the bin is cheaper as these have significant grant funding to offset the cost of providing a bear resistant container. Food waste would be collected weekly. The tipping fee for organic waste is less than mixed waste ($80/tonne). 

Recycling: the cost estimate for recycling includes the same as the other waste streams, except there is a cost incentive provided by RecycleBC incorporated into the cost (which would require a partnership with RecycleBC). This incentive offsets the cost of recycling, and makes offering this stream of waste highly cost effective. Recycling would be collected bi-weekly. 

To clarify, the RDCK does not currently operate any curbside collection programs for waste or recycling. Any garbage collection that is offered in the region is through private subscriptions. Recycling collection in some places (parts of Areas H, I, and J) is provided directly by RecycleBC, who contracts the service to local haulers. Therefore, currently, residents are not charged on their taxes for any collection services. Taxation does support the operation of landfills, transfer stations, and the recycling depots to augment user fees and cost incentives. 

The cost range is actually the high end of two different service delivery methods (split-packer vs. single stream vehicle collection), and has been provided as a large range to allow for smaller operations to participate in a competitive bidding process. The RDCK would try to keep the costs as low as possible to residents. A confirmed rate would be provided after the referendum, should it proceed, as it is dependent on the procurement process. The cost for the service cannot exceed $265/household per year for it to be established. The survey is meant to help the RDCK understand interest and willingness to pay for the service based on the highest cost estimate, as to ensure the consultation would remain valid through to a referendum and possible service establishment.

Thanks for your questions

Hi there, 

Sorry to hear about your troubles with bears, it's a big issue in our region for sure.
If purchased, the curbside containers for food waste would have a metal locking mechanism to prevent the containers from being opened if they were tipped over. However, there really is no such thing as a bear-proof curbside container. The food waste (organics) containers would likely be around 50 liters, and look similar these ones (but have a burlier locking mechanism). 

Residents would continue to need to store their animal-attractive waste in a secure location (indoors ideally). With weekly food waste collection and proper management of smelly materials (meats, bones, cooked food etc.), the smells can be kept to a minimum. By removing food waste from people's properties, the amount of attractants for wildlife in people's backyards would be reduced. Many people have had to stop composting due to bears, rats, and other critters, so this could be a good way to help people continue to separate their food waste without inviting animals into their backyard composters. We're very open to ideas on how to mitigate wildlife issues while still separating organic waste from garbage. Please share your thoughts in the Ideas Section of this consultation.

Thanks for your questions and comments.