HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-09-048 - Loose Leaf Collection Program Survey ResultsREPORT
REPORT TO:
Community Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING:
September 14, 2009
SUBMITTED BY:
Jim Witmer, Director of Operations
PREPARED BY:
Jim Witmer, Director of Operations
WARD(S) INVOLVED:
All
DATE OF REPORT: August 25, 2009
REPORT NO.:
CSD-09-048
SUBJECT:
LOOSE LEAF COLLECTION PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council approve the leaf collection program identified as Option 2 in the survey,
“residents required to place leaves in bags or containers” which consists of the
elimination of loose leaf collection at the curb side; and,
That a bylaw be enacted to repeal Chapter 635 (Garbage) of the City of Kitchener
Municipal Code which permits the placing of loose leaves at the curb in the autumn; and
further,
That Council approve the closure of the following leaf dump sites: Schaefer Park,
Hofstetter Park, Cherry Park, Eastforest Trail Parking Lot and Ardelt Place.
BACKGROUND:
The leaf collection program for the City of Kitchener has undergone a variety of changes based
on discussions with Council over the last several years.
Prior to 2003, there were two levels of service for residents in the City. Residents in the “inner
City” had the option of raking their leaves to the curb for pickup or bagging the leaves for pick up
by the Region under the yard waste program. All other residents had only the option of bagged
leaf pick up under the Regional program at no direct cost to the municipality.
Early in 2003, Council directed that because of safety concerns, the previous leaf program
should not continue and instructed staff to investigate options including asking the Region to
include leaves in their Yard Waste Program. It was felt that by using a very aggressive public
education program that asks residents to no longer rake leaves onto the road, encouraging
residents to bring their leaves to dump sites provided by the City or mulching/composting this
material on their property, it would be effective in the long run with the results of improving road
safety. It also anticipated that full benefits to the program could take several years to achieve.
In the fall of 2003, Council affirmed its decision to discontinue raking of leaves to the street, and
approved the implementation of a fall collection program that advised residents not to rake their
í ó ï
leaves to the curb, with the alternatives of taking their leaves to dump sites located throughout
the City, composting/mulching the material on their property, and bagging leaves for pick up
with the Region of Waterloo’s Yard Waste Program.
Notwithstanding the above, staff still responded to the anticipated leaf drop by scheduling
resources to designated areas where the streets were prone to heavy leaf accumulations that
would cause safety concerns. This confusing service level was dropped in favour of a consistent
City wide program which provided all residents with a variety of options for leaf disposal.
The last change was the Region’s decision to remove bagged leaf pickup from the Region’s
annual yard waste program as the City had revised their service level, which discouraged raking
leaves to the curb and encouraged residents to use other options which included bagged leaf
pickup. The Region then responded informing the City there would be a cost associated with the
bagged leaf pickup program as part of the annual yard waste program.
In 2004, Council directed staff to:
1. Continue providing street level pickup of leaves using conventional methods while
aggressively communicating to area residents their options for leaf disposal.
2. Engage in discussions with the Region to ensure leaves bagged in Kraft paper bags are
part of the annual yard waste program and are picked up in a cost effective manner.
3. Not change the leaf pickup program from 2003 and to communicate this to the residents.
During 2005, staff informed Council that recommendations 2 and 3 noted above proved to be
successful in allowing residents several options for leaf disposal.
A review was proposed for 2006 to determine the effectiveness of the program based on the
data collected over the previous years. It was also proposed to evaluate the program and
compare our methods with those of other municipalities. The review was completed in 2006
and report (CSD-06-076) which compared Kitchener with Cambridge and Waterloo (Program
Length, Leaf Disposal Options and Communication) indicated our current leaf program was both
effective and efficient, offering residents a wide variety of options to address the fall leaf drop.
2006 was a very successful leaf collection season and the program seemed to be working.
In November 2007, a Leaf Collection Update (CSD-07-108) reported that the area was
experiencing a very late leaf drop with 25 percent of the leaves still on the trees. Typically, the
program was running from mid October to the end of November. Staff resources would be
assigned to collection activity as required into December and beyond if necessary to address
the hazard that loose leaves can present if left unaddressed on roadways.
It was confirmed that the Region’s bi-weekly collection of yard waste would end at the end of
November. However, the city would continue to collect leaves through utilizing the 12 leaf drop
off sites into December as necessary. City staff would try to have everything completed by the
second week of December.
The report also noted that due to the lateness of the program there was a potential for conflict if
it snowed prior to all the leaves being collected. If it occurred, we would attempt to plow the
snow and still leave the leaves on the road adjacent to the curb for pick up if weather permitted,
or a melt before the accumulation of snow required the windrow to be plowed up onto the
boulevard for safety and road maintenance standard compliance.
í ó î
Communication through this period about the two options left available was done with the
assistance of staff from the Mayor’s office and on the website. Unfortunately, the snow came
early and heavy in November and December which, despite staff’s efforts, created a significant
problem for staff which necessitated plowing the snow onto the boulevard. The City undertook
to complete the pickup in January 2008 at the first thaw event and then later that spring.
In September 2008 a Leaf Program Update (CSD-08-076) was presented to Council. Staff
proposed a full review of the current city-wide program in 2009 to determine whether it was still
appropriate, cost effective, fair, or even warranted. Further, the timing allowed another year to
assess additional improvements that were put in place in 2008.
In April 2009 a PowerPoint presentation outlining the current program and proposed options for
the loose leaf collection program was presented to Council for consideration. After further
dialogue around the current program and options available, council requested that staff report
back in May with additional information on what our neighbouring municipalities are doing,
additional enforcement techniques to prevent illegal dumping, increased street sweeping, etc.
REPORT:
In May staff was directed to undertake a public consultation advising residents that a review of
its fall leaf collection program was being undertaken in an effort to ensure its cost efficiency and
effectiveness for citizens.
From June 15 through July 20, the city surveyed residents for their feedback on five options
regarding the future of the leaf collection program. The options included:
Option 1: Homeowners take responsibility for leaves
Option 2: Residents required to place leaves in bags or containers
Option 3: Status quo - current program remains unchanged
Option 4: New leaf collection program
Option 5: Single collection and reduced leaf drop-off sites
To make it as convenient as possible for all residents to participate in the consultation process,
feedback was accepted through various methods including: an online survey at
www.kitchener.ca; printed surveys in Your Kitchener and the Kitchener Citizen, booths (June 27
and July 4) at the Kitchener Market; surveys available at all community centers, senior centers
and indoor pools; a dedicated phone line where comments (or requests for surveys) could be
recorded and a dedicated email address: (leafcollection@kitchener.ca).
Additionally, the leaf collection options survey was advertised for two weeks on local radio
reaching the broadest demographic – KOOL FM and KFUN.
As a result of these efforts, the city received substantial feedback. The city received 520
responses to the survey. Twenty-three were excluded for not including contact information
(used for confirming that there were no double entries) and six were unable to be counted
because their option preferences were unclear. The following is a breakdown of how the
remaining 497 surveys were received.
í ó í
Venue # Surveys received Percentage of total
Online
22745.7%
(live on June15)
Kitchener Citizen
12625.4%
(issued June 24)
Your Kitchener
8316.7%
(issued July 4)
Kitchener Market
285.6%
(June 27 and July 4)
Mailed in/ from City facilities
285.6%
(surveys available June 15)
Voice Mail
51%
(available June 15)
Emailed
00%
(available June 15)
In regards to the preferred options, residents were first asked for their opinion on each of the
five options – whether they supported each individual option or did not support it and, if they did
not support it – why. They were able to indicate support for more than one option. The results of
the general feedback for each option and the five reasons for why it was not supported are
included in the chart.
Option # of Responses Comments: Why in support of this option
not
in support
OPTION 1
177
Need leaf drop-off sites: too far to drive to landfill;
(25.11%)
Designated areas of city with heavy tree growth
need curb side raking option;
Composting not possible because of maple leaf
diseases;
Inconvenient and even impossible for too many
homeowners;
City wants trees, and homeowners pay taxes, so
leaves should be collected.
Need curb side pick-up of loose leaves;
196
Too many leaves from mature trees: hardship to
OPTION 2
(27.8%)
bag and dispose of leaves from properties with
many, especially for seniors;
Too many people dispose of materials that aren’t
accepted at drop-off sites;
City should pick up leaves from its own trees;
Duplicates Region service.
159
Leaves at roadside are dangerous: end up on
(22.55%)
others’ property, block rainwater run-off, slippery
OPTION 3
for cars and cyclists, hazard for children;
Too expensive;
Scheduling of retrieval off-street is too haphazard,
leaving leaves out all winter at times;
Rewards laziness;
Question how this costs $400,000 more than
option 2 when the only addition is curb side pick-
up of loose leaves.
í ó ì
125
Defining dates doesn’t take weather into account;
(17.73%)
Too complicated and prone to error;
OPTION 4
Too costly;
No recourse if leaves drop after end date;
Taxpayers should be treated equally.
48
Needs to be more flexible than one day only: too
OPTION 5
(6.81%)
easy to miss, with significant penalty;
Scheduled leaf collection doesn’t seem to work
well (people already miss and are unaware of
multiple pick-up dates) so it would be difficult to
properly advertise one collection to all citizens;
Too costly, especially for such a limited and rigid
program;
Leaves blowing around before pick-up would
create unsafe traffic and drainage conditions;
Untenable if all residents put out numerous bags.
Residents were then requested to choose a preferred option, those results are summarized
below.
Preferred Option # of Responses Percentage of Total
132 26.67
Option 1
159 32.12
Option 2
126 25.45
Option 3
Option 4 59 11.92
3.84
Option 5 19
58.79 percent
Based on the survey results, of the respondents are indicating that they believe
the city needs to make a significant change to the way we do business and how much money
we allocate to the program of leaf collection.
In regards to the preferred option, residents indicted that they preferred Option 2 because it
prevents sweeping leaves to the curb; provides enough options for people who want to do
something; scheduled leaf collection never works properly; maintains the drop-off sites, with the
lowest cost to taxpayers and the cost is within reason; takes the environment into account;
offers curb side collection of bagged leaves; majority of residents can manage this; and not too
different from current program, yet makes citizens take more responsibility.
At least 14 percent of respondents self identified themselves as seniors. Some had concerns
about losing the ability to rake leaves to the curb – there were also those seniors who welcomed
this approach as they were tired of having to rake and bag leaves from their younger able-
bodied neighbours’ yards. For those who expressed concerns about their ability to rake and
bag their own leaves we will be including contact information, similar to snow removal, in the
communication packages for residents.
One resident even suggested that we solicit the schools for assistance by using students who
need community services hours as a means of helping out their seniors and neighbours.
It should be noted that, if Council’s direction involves discontinuing the curb-side leaf collection
program, attention must be paid to Chapter 635 (Garbage) of the City of Kitchener Municipal
Code. This by-law is the City’s older waste collection by-law, which is, for all intents and
purposes, no longer necessary since the Region of Waterloo assumed responsibility for waste
í ó ë
collection and implemented their waste collection by-law. However, the by-law is still in effect
and contains a provision that permits leaves to be raked to the curb for collection. As such, the
by-law should be repealed if curbside collection is repealed.
FINANCIAL:
The recommended program is expected to result in an ability to re-direct up to $300,000 of the
current $412,000 budget annually into either 1; other higher priority areas such as turf, road and
watercourse maintenance which are either lacking in sufficient resources now to meet
constituent expectations or are stopped in order to begin the leaf collection in the fall, or 2;
overall budget reduction towards the 2010 corporate operating budget target.
Note: the second option requires additional work planning analysis to determine net impact on
labour and equipment usage. Final resolution in this regard will be referred to the 2010
Operating Budget Process.
COMMUNICATION:
As soon as a decision is reached by Council, staff within the communications division will
develop a full communications plan aimed at informing residents of the change in the program
and assistance available for those residents that may have difficulty taking care of their own
leaves. The plan will utilize a variety of communication tools and venues to ensure, once again,
that the message is shared widely within the community.
CONCLUSION:
It is anticipated that there will be growing pains associated with the change in direction for the
City as it relates to leaf collection, however the long term benefits both environmentally as well
as financially will outweigh the initial discomfort.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, General Manager, Community Services Department
í ó ê
Leaf Collection Options Survey
Feedback Evaluation
After a recent review of its fall leaf collection program, the City of Kitchener is
considering changes to the program in an effort to ensure its cost efficiency and
effectiveness for citizens.
From June 15 through July 20, the city surveyed residents for their feedback on five
options regarding the future of the leaf collection program. The options included:
Option 1: Homeowners take responsibility for leaves
Option 2: Residents required to place leaves in bags or containers
Option 3: Status quo - current program remains unchanged
Option 4: New leaf collection program
Option 5: Single collection and reduced leaf drop-off sites
To make it as convenient as possible for all residents to participate in the consultation
process, feedback was accepted through various methods including: an online survey at
www.kitchener.ca; printed surveys in Your Kitchener and the Kitchener Citizen, booths
(June 27 and July 4) at the Kitchener Market; surveys available at all community centres,
senior centres and indoor pools; a dedicated phone line where comments (or requests
for surveys) could be recorded and a dedicated email address:
(leafcollection@kitchener.ca).
Additionally, the leaf collection options survey was advertised for two weeks on local
radio reaching the broadest demographic – KOOL FM and KFUN.
As a result of these efforts, the city received substantial feedback. More than 500
Kitchener residents took the time to participate in the survey/consultation process. Below
is a summary of the feedback that was received.
í ó é
TOTAL # SURVEYS RECEIVED520
(see note below)
Breakdown of surveys received by venue:
Venue# Surveys received Percentage of total
Online22745.7
(live on June15)
Kitchener Citizen
12625.4
(issued June 24)
Your Kitchener
8316.7
(issued July 4)
Kitchener Market 285.6
(June 27 and July 4)
Mailed in/ from City
285.6
facilities
(surveys available June 15)
Voice Mail 51
(available June 15)
Emailed00
(available June 15)
Exclusions from Survey:
17 exclusions due to improper contact information.
6 exclusions due to unclear option preference.
NOTE:
The 23 exclusions are not included in the total number of surveys used to
calculate any of the percentages throughout this report. The percentages are calculated
out of the number of accepted surveys, which total 497.
í ó è
General Support for EACH Option:
Residents were first asked for their opinion on each of the five options – whether they
supported it or did not support it and, if they did not support it – why. They were able to
indicate support for more than one option. The results of the general feedback for each
option and the top five reasons for why it was not supported are included in the chart
below.
Option# of Responses Comments: Why not in support of this option
in support
OPTION 1
177
Need leaf drop-off sites: too far to drive
(25.11%)
to landfill;
Designated areas of city with heavy tree
growth need curbside raking option;
Composting not possible because of
maple leaf diseases;
Inconvenient and even impossible for too
many homeowners;
City wants trees, and homeowners pay
taxes, so leaves should be collected.
Need curbside pick-up of loose leaves;
196
Too many leaves from mature trees:
OPTION 2
(27.8%)
hardship to bag and dispose of leaves
from properties with many, especially for
seniors;
Too many people dispose of materials
that aren’t accepted at drop-off sites;
City should pick up leaves from its own
trees;
Duplicates Region service.
159
Leaves at roadside are dangerous: end
(22.55%)
up on others’ property, block rainwater
OPTION 3
run-off, slippery for cars and cyclists,
hazard for children;
Too expensive;
Scheduling of retrieval off-street is too
haphazard, leaving leaves out all winter
at times;
Rewards laziness;
Question how this costs $400,000 more
than option 2 when the only addition is
curbside pick-up of loose leaves.
125
Defining dates doesn’t take weather into
(17.73%)
account;
OPTION 4
Too complicated and vulnerable to
screw-ups;
Too costly;
No recourse if leaves drop after end
í ó ç
date;
Taxpayers should be treated equally.
48
Needs to be more flexible than one day
OPTION 5 (6.81%)
only: too easy to miss, with significant
penalty;
Scheduled leaf collection doesn’t seem
to work well (people already miss and
are unaware of multiple pick-up dates) so
it would be difficult to properly advertise
one collection to all citizens;
Too costly, especially for such a limited
and rigid program;
Leaves blowing around before pick-up
would create unsafe traffic and drainage
conditions;
Untenable if all residents put out
numerous bags.
Support forPREFERRED Option:
Preferred Option # of Responses Percentage of Total
13226.67
Option 1
15932.12
Option 2
12625.45
Option 3
5911.92
Option 4
Option 5 193.84
Reasons for selection of preferred option (#2, at 32.12%)
Prevents sweeping leaves to curb;
Provides enough options for people who want to do something;
Scheduled leaf collection never works properly;
Maintains the drop-off sites, with the lowest cost to taxpayers;
Cost is within reason;
Takes the environment into account;
Offers curbside collection, of bagged leaves;
Lowest cost out of options in which the City has responsibility for
collection;
Majority of residents can manage this;
Not too different from current program, yet makes citizens take more
responsibility.
í ó ïð
Support/Non Support for reducing leaf drop off sites:
QuestionYESNO
Would you Include total # of responses Include total # of responses
support reducing ANDAND
the number ofPercentage of overall total Percentage of overall total
leaf drop off sites
during the leaf 230184
collection (46.3%)(37%)
program
QuestionYESNO
Would you Include total # of responses Include total # of responses
supportANDAND
eliminating leaf Percentage of overall total Percentage of overall total
drop off sites
from the 164261
collection (33%)(52.5)
program.
NOTE:
Some respondents did not answer the two questions above regarding
support/non-support for reducing leaf drop-off sites:
No response to first question above: 83 (16.7%);
No response to second question above: 72 (14.5).
Other comment themes:
Trim more trees on streets so they won’t make such a mess;
Leaf drop-off sites should be better lit, so people can spot illegal activity, and the
rules should be clearly posted, with better enforcement;
Promote use of reusable plastic containers for leaf disposal as using bags is
wasteful since so many will be needed;
Citizens consistently pay higher taxes yet are provided less services: tax money
should be spent less on things like downtown, LRT, sports and schools and more
on taxpayer services such as leaf collection;
City responsibility to collect leaves, especially since many come from city trees;
Advertise the benefits of mulched leaves for gardening and subsidize cost of
getting mulching-capable lawnmowers;
Continue leaf collection later into fall/early winter and keep drop-sites open
longer;
Reduce property taxes, if a less expensive option is chosen;
If curbside raking or drop-off sites are eliminated, citizens should get the
incentive of free leaf-bags, up to a certain number;
If methods change drastically: large amounts of non-compliance might incur
additional costs for the city to rectify them, people may want to get rid of their
trees, and the amount of illegal dumping may increase.
í ó ïï
NOTE:
Many respondents indicated concern for senior citizens and whether they would
be capable of following the new collection programs:
73 respondents self-identified as seniors, who would have trouble bagging
leaves;
30 respondents indicated concern on behalf of seniors and the difficulties
they would incur without curbside raking.
í ó ïî