You need to be signed in to add your comment.

Improvement Options Report Summary

about 1 year ago

During the Feb. 4 study session, Council directed staff to gather Lakewood-specific details on three residential waste collection improvement options—Enhanced Licensing, Contracted System, and Preferred Hauler System. The 2019 Analysis of Residential Waste Collection Improvement Options report analyzes the three policy options to better understand the potential benefits and impacts of each on:

  • Household costs
  • Household services
  • Customer service and hauler accountability
  • Neighborhood impacts: noise, safety, and neighborhood aesthetics
  • Environmental impacts: waste diversion, air quality, and GHG emissions
  • Household choice among haulers
  • Business and market competition
  • City administrative and operating costs

The following tables and charts summarize these findings.


Summary of benefits and drawbacks of Enhanced Licensing:

Enhanced Licensing maintains the current open subscription system while adding new residential waste hauler licensing requirements intended to reduce neighborhood impacts, increase waste diversion, increase customer service and increase hauler accountability.


Summary of benefits and drawbacks of a Contracted System:

In a Contracted System, the City contracts with one or multiple haulers for residential trash collection for all residential properties with seven or fewer units. contract(s) would include provisions intended to reduce neighborhood impacts, increase waste diversion, increase customer service and increase hauler accountability.


Summary of benefits and drawbacks of a Preferred Hauler System

In a Preferred Hauler System, the City contracts with one hauler to be the City’s preferred provider for residential trash collection. Residents could voluntarily choose the City’s preferred provider to receive the agreed upon pricing and services. The contract would include provisions intended to increase waste diversion, increase customer service and increase hauler accountability for participating residents. In order to achieve communitywide environmental benefits and for the preferred hauler to remain cost competitive, the Preferred Hauler System would need to be paired with Enhanced Licensing.



STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Staff finds that the most effective option for achieving the widest range of community goals is the Contracted System with multiple districts and new licensing requirements for all haulers in the City in order to set a fair citywide standard for services. Efficiency gains realized through this option enable the community to access new services, significantly reduce neighborhood impacts, and provide an economic incentive to reduce household waste and overall costs. Through the Contracted System, Lakewood can realize the benefits associated with organized collection and with market competition.

Download the full report to learn more.


Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
comment
Reply notification settings
Submitting your comment
Cancel
  • AmyP 9 months ago
    While I appreciate the city looking to improve the city I think there are other critical areas that need to be addressed first. I appreciate the freedom and opportunity to choose my own trash collection service. With the significant building and growth in Lakewood maybe road conditions and congested traffic solutions could be looked in to first. Or maybe focus on the increased homeless crisis in community. Finding solutions for this issue that will help support the community, homeowners and the homeless may be more beneficial than the city taking over waste collection services.
    Reply Do you agree? Agree 0 Disagree 0 Alert moderator
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • yogascience 10 months ago
    Costs are much too high. Especially for people who share trash service with neighbors and pay half of a lower cost than city wide would cost each person individually. The costs don’t make sense. The city needs to set up slash and leaf collection— Basically a composting system. This will do much more to reduce waste than anything else. Also, unless people are charged based on volume, neighbors who generate very little trash will be punished. They will heavily subsidize their neighbors trash use who generate large volumes. This is a bad proposal. It’s not well developed and needed much more time to be worked on before going to a vote. Many of us provide this feedback but the City didn’t listen.
    Reply Do you agree? Agree 1 Disagree 0 Alert moderator
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • Dms almost 1 year ago
    I have followed your reports with great interest and I must say I am surprised at how expensive the rates are in the contracted system you are recommending, I am currently paying $16 per month for a 96 gallon container and could add recycling for $5 more. Under your system I would have to pay $27-$35? Doesn’t make sense. Also compared to the prices you provided earlier in the process for Golden, the prices you are showing are 2-3 times higher! This doesn’t make sense as Lakewood is a larger entity with more purchasing power. Additionally, the $1.2 million set up fee for the city billing and container purchase seem like a poor use of city resources. Most of us have trash cans that will work just fine. Purchasing new ones does not achieve sustainability! What happens to the old ones. Finally, I am totally opposed to the single stream recycling vs the Quail Street option. Sorted recyclables are much more useful and needed, and less ends up in the trash. I question the market and environmental viability of adding additional households to single stream recycling. Finally, if your plan is good and you choose a preferred provider, people will want to use them and will navigate to them and you will accomplish your goals. If your plan is not good and you force us all to a contracted system, we are stuck with them for many years. I urge you to reconsider your recommendation for a contracted system that doesn’t work for many of us for many different reasons.
    Reply Do you agree? Agree 3 Disagree 0 Alert moderator Hide replies (4)
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
    • NH 11 months ago
      I can’t understand for the life of me why the City thinks it should dictate that I pay MORE than what I currently am paying? This is just shifting costs. Once again only those on the most limited plan will save anything. And they will do this at the expense of people like me who will now be forced to pay about $10 more per month than what I’m currently paying. This proposal brings absolutely no cost savings to many of us and takes away our right to choose and ability to hold contractors accountable when their service is lacking. I urge you to forget this idea and focus your time and our tax dollars on other issues this City is facing (like homeless camps along the Bear Creek Trail and increasing crime rates).
      Reply Do you agree? Agree 2 Disagree 0 Alert moderator
      Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
    • Tfinn 11 months ago
      Hi DMS - I'm wondering where you found the estimated costs under Lakewood's proposed new plan? You mention in your post above that you'd pay $27-$35 under the new plan, where did you get that? Just wanting to look to company what I currently pay to the new proposed rates... Thanks!
      Reply Do you agree? Agree 0 Disagree 0 Alert moderator
      Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
      • Admin Commented Lynn 11 months ago
        We can help direct you to the numbers that DMS referenced. The price ranges were received from companies who bid on the RFP that the city issued earlier this year. We've created a user friendly chart as an image available on the project page: Lakewood.org/ResidentialWaste.
        Reply Do you agree? Agree 0 Disagree 0 Alert moderator
        Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
        • Tfinn 11 months ago
          Thanks, I found the chart and based on these estimates, with the small amount of trash our family generates and the recycling we do, we would pay more than what we currently pay with ADS. We already compost in our yard so we would not use that. There are some pros (less trucks mainly) but that's hard to swallow when it seems it's going to be more expensive : (
          Reply Do you agree? Agree 2 Disagree 0 Alert moderator
          Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • Nate 12 months ago
    We pay $17/month for 96 G trash and $4 for 96 G recycle ($21) but then you need to add in all the fees at $9.50/Month total we are at $30.40 per month. I would like to be able to try the small can and save enough to take my family to Sweet Tomatoes 3 times a year. It seems that most all our seniors will be able to save $$ over the current system rather than subsidizing others that produce more trash. (although I think we could use 2 sizes for the recycling container options big and small so some seniors don't need to move great big containers to the street). Then to go from an average of 11 truck passes per street (or 22 on a cul de sac) to 4 truck passes (or 8 on cul de sac) is a HUGE plus. Benefits being reduced total truck miles in Lakewood reducing greenhouse gasses, increasing street safety, decreasing street noise, reducing garbage cans on the street from 6 days a week to 1 day a week, and the added benefit of reducing the amount of money we taxpayers need to spend on street maintenance.... Remember that the "Range of prices" reflects the high and low bidder... so, if we get the lower end of the "range" when they compete and bid for our $$ then most all of us should be able to save money. :) To me it just seems that the benefits far out weight the few negatives of switching over to the contracted system... Please... full steam ahead. :)
    Reply Do you agree? Agree 1 Disagree 0 Alert moderator
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link