Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Exhibit CC 08-07-12 #1 Study Session on Litter Reduction Plan
C l ` ��' {;(' CC 8-7-12#1 CC 8-7-12#1 ' � Litter Reduction Mandate Why- federal Clean Water Act gf RR ''w'°6 � Requires NPDES permits for stormwater discharges from municipal storm sewer systems California Regional Water Quality Control Board » San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) tiliiiiiimm..__.!_' ______„ City's Existing Short Term Plan Litter (Trash) Reduction Mandate Submitted 2/1/2012 Indlvldual Control Measure Municipal Regional stormwater `°""°'M•""r''""`'"d`"'"`"°° " wedReda«d Lo•dR.dato!oad6ed"red Short-Term li[br ReduRlon Plan Rrdnallon lies,/w.r) 1x1 lol./y99d NPDES Permit(MRP) Erect°I%, Existing Enhanced 5heet5vxepinp 67 0.6% 67 Cr.dks Provision C.10. Cfl-1:Single-U�e C.o yov[Bog Policy(Irp Marke) 6.0% 724 6.5% 791 Cfl-2:Polystyrene Foam Food Service Wore Po lity 2.0% 241 B.5% 1,032 Achieve 400/b July 2111,2014 CR-3:Public Education and Outreach Progroms 8.0% 965 16.5% 1,994 7 7 f CR.4:Redu lron of hush tom Un o seed Loads 5.0% 603 214% I 2,601 (Plan submitted by 211112) CR-5:An[i Littering and Illegal Dumping Enforcement 4.0% 483 25 4% 3,084 CR-6:Improved Trash Bin/Container Management 3.0% 362 28.1% 3,416 CR-]:Single-Use Food and Beverage Warr Policy 0.0% 0 28.4% 3,446 Achieve 70%by Jul 1,2017 Y y f OF-l:On-LOnd Ckan 273 30.6% 3,719 (Plan submitted by 211114) OF-2:Enhanreds rer5weepinq 0 30.6% 3,719 OF3:Portial Trash Capture 0 30.6% 3,719 OF-4 Inkt Maintenance - 0 30.6% 3,719 OFS:Full Trash Capture - 453 34.4% I 4,172 Achieve 100%by July 1,2022 — F6:Geek Cleomup — - 676 40.0% 1 4,848 (Plan submitted by 211114) T"'' _ "" °'°'° °°0% `'°" 1 CC 8-7-12#1 Current Litter Controls in Cupertino How Recology Currently Manages Control Measures % Additional Estimated Reduction Cost Plastic Bags &Polystyrene No Parking Allowed on Street Sweeping Days 0.6 None Polystyrene Ware Ban on City Property 2.0 None Education&Outreach Events&Evaluation 8.0 -$500/yrstaff time ■ Receives revenue from its recycling processor for all Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Campaigns recyclables collected in Cupertino Prevent Litter from Uncovered Loads- 5.0 Staff coordinate w/ Sheriff Enforcement-Tarps on Trucks Sheriff;&Recology tarps ■ The recycling processor accepts all plastics including plastic Illegal Dumping Enforcement 2.0 NPS Inspector's time Require Adequate Trash Container Service 3.0 Per French'.Agreement bags.However,the bags are problematic because they get On Lend Cleanup 1.0 -$500/yr with volunteers tangled in the material sorting equipment Full Capture Device Installation&Maintenance 3.8 $0-Grants&Agreement Increase Drain Inlet Maintenance to Annually 3,5 -$25,000/yr ► Styrofoam or expanded polystyrene foam food ware is not Creek Cleanup Events with Volunteers 3.0 $3,000/yr staff time recyclable at local centers Estimated Total Reduction 31.3 $28,000/yr Loose ,a , plastic bags . ,.. clog up the ,._ - :, e�,d ,, � �,9 tumblers on .. ,, � ' � the sorting r ,. Single-Use Carry Out line g Bags 3 !,!,....---.4)4374tei.,1:::::::vritt � � „.________ __ ___ m ri m ,,. _ 2 CC 8-7-12#1 Teacher-Student Event Calabazas Creek ', .. Plastic 1 �• Bags St Joseph's School,Cupertino n i Z dam'R ! { >'4i. te X tea. Ro ' i. ,p A 7" Liii.„ i Stevens Creek Cleanup Volunteers Single-Use Carryout Bag Ban from Abundant Life,Cupertino San Mateo County s Regional EIR ► March 2012—City Council directed staff to participate in the —::-Iti ';°.". ,; San Mateo County Regional EIR skatj' x ► Regional approach a consistent ordinance eliminates r y jurisdictional disadvantages for businesses and lessens `' ., a~ bilk confusion for customers � < it ► Participation in the EIR requires consideration of an " - ordinance that expands the bag ban to all retail except restaurants and non-profits and charges a fee for paper pig, bags(12 credits) a d "` �� 3 CC 8-7-12#1 Cities that have joined San Mateo Status of EIR and Targeted County's Regional EIR: Bag Ban Timeline Belmont San Bruno Milpitas Millbrae East Palo Alto Cupertino ►June 22- Draft EIR available for public Brisbane San Carlos Los Gatos Pacifica Foster City Los Altos comment Burlingame San Mateo Campbell Portola Valley Woodside Mountain View ►August 6—End of draft EIR public comment Colma Redwood City period Menlo Park Half Moon Bay Daly City ► September/October 2012-San Mateo South San Francisco County hearings on Final EIR San Mateo County Santa Clara County Bag Bans Passed Bans being Considered or Underway City Status Comments City Status Comments San 2007 Passed 1"bag ban In California at large grocers Francisco -Feb 2012 Expanded ban&chargedl 0 cents for paper bags Mountain View -Ordinance being developed for October 2012 with effective dateJuly2013 -Joined Regional EIR Palo Alto Effective Sept 2009- Only Grocery Stores Milpitas -Completed bag ban study in Apr 2011 -Joined Regional San Jose Effective Jan 2012 EIR - Excludes restaurants&non-profits;10 cents for paper bags Sunnyvale Effective Jan 2012 -(Mar 2013 Ph.2 to include all stores) Los Altos -Joined the Regional EIR Campbell -West Valley's JPA recommended that each member agency S.Clara Effective Jan 2012 Los Gatos adopt a ban-Campbell&Los Gatos joined Regional EIR County Saratoga Santa Cruz EffectiveJuly 2012 Cupertino -Joined the Regional EIR County -Mirrors San Jose's 4 CC 8-7-12#1 Proposed State Bag Legislation Proposed State Bag Legislation AB 1998 AB 298 ■ Jan 1,2014,if adopted-would prohibit large stores from ►Jan 1,2010-Made it through State Assembly and providing single use carryout bags several Senate committees • July 1,2015,if adopted-would expand to convenience food stores,foodmarts,and other specified stores ► July 1,2010—Failed to secure enough votes to ■ July 1,2015 implementation date for all stores would not be pass soon enough for the City to receive full litter reduction credit for the 40%short term plan Recommended City of Cupertino Public Outreach&Participation Bag Ban Timeline Single-use Bag Ban • October 2012-Final EIR Certified ■ October 2012—Send notices to Retailers and request input on draft ordinance ■ January 2013—Bring ordinance to Cupertino City Council for ■ January 2013—Cupertino City Council to consider Draft consideration Ordinance ■ January-Sept 2013—Preparation and Outreach ■ October 2013—Ordinance effective date • October 2013—Effective date for Cupertino's Bag Ban 5 CC 8-7-12#1 Cupertino's Status on Expanded Polystyrene{EPS) Foam Food Containers Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) ► March 2012-Council directed Staff to provide more information on an Expanded Polystyrene(EPS)Foam Food Container Ban ■ Cupertino's initial 40%litter reduction plan did not include an EPS Ban Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) or EPS Ban In Place "foam-to-go" Municipality Comments Palo Alto Effective Earth Day 2010 Santa Clara - Palo Alto has 90%compliance with the ban @4 ` May 2012 adopted ban at restaurants using a CEQA 1P County Negative Declaration.Effective Feb 2013 Santa Clara ' f $ 1 Oct 2011 Resolution prohibiting purchase of EPS food& Valley Water beverage a b a containers with Water District funds t District g �— •' � � San Mateo July 2011 EPS Foodware Ordinance went into effect r� t 1 County t q 7 > 6 CC 8-7-12#1 EPS Bans Being Considered Proposed State EPS Legislation SB 568 Municipality Comments ► Feb 17,2011—SB 568 Introduced San Jose - Staff conducting analysis of economic impacts on all ► Sept 8,2011—SB 568 ordered to inactive file by bill's restaurants to report back to Council in Fall 2012 - Staff is developing an ordinance for Council's author due to insufficient votes Mountain View consideration in Jan 2014,effective July 1,2014 ► Current Status-On Hold Sunnyvale - Discussing the development of an EPS ordinance Santa Clara County Why Cupertino Should Consider an Recycling&Waste Reduction Commission(RWRC) EPS Ban EPS Ban Recommendation ■ Styrofoam pieces are among the most difficult, ■ July 1,2012 adopt a policy banning EPS on the agency's property; time-consuming and costly materials to clean up (CUPERTINO COMPLETED 1112011) from creek banks ■ July 1,2013 adopt a ban on EPS food containers at all prepared- ■ Styrofoam pieces pose a threat to aquatic life food vendors and implement by July 1 2014 ► Earn—6 additional litter reduction credits ► July 1,2015 require food vendors to use only containers that can be ■ Minimal cost to the City($13K for CEQA Initial processed through the city's recycling&composting programs Study and Negative Declaration) 7 CC 8-7-12#1 City of Cupertino Proposed EPS Ban Public Outreach Possible EPS Ban Timeline ■ February to April 2013-Outreach to prepared-food vendors ■ October 2012—Hire consultant to conduct an Initial including stakeholder meeting(s) ■ April 2013—Council Study Session to discuss Ordinance Study and Negative Declaration provisions and receive stakeholder input ■ June 2013-City Council Public Hearing to consider ■ June 2013-City Council Public Hearing to consider Ordinance Ordinance adoption adoption • June 2014-City of Cupertino's EPS Ban effective • June 2013—May 2014—Preparation and Outreach date Provide educational material,conduct restaurant site visits etc ► June 2014—Ordinance effective date Other Activities Other Litter Reduction • More Frequent Street Sweeping in retail area Actions t o consider ■ Anti-Litter Ordinance could earn substantial credit,depending on tracking and level of enforcement. in place of Bag or EPS Bans • Antilittersignage ■ More Frequent Catch Basin Cleaning ■ Business Improvement Districts(work with retail centers on improved bin container management and maintenance) • Hinged drain inlet screens(-100 trash capture devices) 8 CC 8-7-12#1 Estimated Cost to Implement Bans Prioritized Litter Control Actions &Costs Control Measures Credit-% Preliminary Cost Reduction Estimates Control Measures % Additional Estimated Increase Street Sweeping 12 miles in Retail area 2.5-4.0 $10K-$15K annually- Reduction Cost ($40-$60K 2x weekly) Plastic Bag Ban 12 Estimate$5K start-up' Enforcement-Other deterrents(e.g.Anti-littering 2-4; -$20K materials*$10K at all Retail except Restaurants' percentage Education and Outreach Code)Select a deterrent,signs,lances,increased Or,justify -$20K annual code aintenance;credit varies depending on measures enforcement credits And$SK for City's m more credit promotional reusable beg Provide more public area trash containers 8 1 per 17Ac. Sham cost with property give-away(already improved maintenance in high later generation area, drainage owner-$15K per retail conducted annually at City's area area for appropriate bins Earth Day Event) Install 100 retractable drain inlet screens in 15.3 Estimate-$150K for Expanded Polystyrene Food-Ware Ban 6 Estimated$18K over 2 Retail area with weakly sweeping(or twice 100 partial trash capture "Foam-to-go- percentage years. weekly) at Prepared-food vendor establishments in credits $13K Consultant for an Initial Drain lnbl Maintenance annually or 2x/yr-need new 3.7 New equipment-5150K the City of Cupertino Study and Negative truck&maintenance equipment •staff hours-$25 Wyr Declaration Install 10 full trash capture drain inlet devices 1.8 $20K+High ongoing Plus 55K for education& Maintenance Cost outreach to businesses& Require food service vendors to provide a 10% 12 or 24 Cost of Neg Dec or EIR public discount for"bring your own"or 10%fee for •Enforcement at Food sin•le-use take-out beverage&food containers &Beverage Vendors eearticipation in EIR—$25k to$30K Value ryt� °�� Trash Characterization Study " c Source:Bay Area Stormwater Management Agenda Association ieusMAA) Litter Characterization by Volume z 'Z',4 2 , 4---,,------' -'-. al Recycle ble Beverage ` 63 �8,g ,r t s e Containers I ■Single-use Plastic Grocery€ "°` °, 4 ` 4'1 Bags a Styrofoam 2,% in s ,,- 7. s a ■Plastic(e.g,cups,lids, � �Y 4. � ,h ' . w `°e $ wrappers,straws) + Paper Note:Characterization indicated approx 1 5% ah 85%dirt and _49% � •- ,�:,��`, M trhser iscellaneous otdebns and -r 9 • CC 8-7-12#1 Street Sweeping Retractable Drain Inlet Screens Sam 104 at x�a °ir ��� j� t -tier 0 vi P x Regional Water Quality Control Bard's Comments on C I Q S i ng Tracking Method and Municipal Plans ► Bring back an item for consideration and formal action? , In June the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB) challenged much of"BASMAA's credit methodology ' staff will have several months worth of outreach&work The RWQCB Staff stated that Single Use Plastic Bag and to do before implementing a bag ban by 10/1113 Polystyrene Ordinance credits are"within a reasonable range" ► If Council directs staff to bring a bag ban ordinance if enforcement 8 verification are provided forward for consideration,outreach should begin now The RWQCB had concerns with all of the other categories ► If Council directs staff to prepare for a potential EPS BASMAA and Reps from City of Cupertino,Sunnyvale and San Jose ban,a CEQA Initial Study&Negative Declaration(- are planning to meet with Water Board's Executive Officer to discuss crediting methodology $13K)should begin soon -The Bay Area Slonnwater Management Agencies Association(BASMAA)is a collaborative .'.resenting all 76 Bay Area Municipal Stormwaler NPDES Permitees 10 I k p,i eC 619)? 12 Karen B. Guerin From: Lola Kashyap [lolakashyap©gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 10:08 AM To: City of Cupertino Environmental Division; governmentaffairs©cupertino-chamber.org; City Council Subject: Plastic Bag ban Hi, I am a Cupertino resident and am writing to express my support for a ban on single-use plastic bags similar to cities such as San Jose. I am dismayed by the amount of trash, especially plastic bags that I see when I go running in our Monta Vista neighborhood. This is especially disappointing in a city that boasts of highly educated residents. I am certain that majority of this trash did not get blown out of pick-up truck beds and such...it was tossed by careless people. The issue is especially critical since this trash will pollute ecologically sensitive Permanente Creek before ending up in the bay. I am sure the majority of Cupertino residents have shopped in neighboring San Jose at one time or another since their ban went into effect...we have been "trained" to bring our own bags so implementing a ban would be easier in Cupertino. I strongly recommend that while implementing a ban on single-use plastic bags we should go all the way and ban styrofoam containers as well. It would be less expensive to ban both plastic bags and styrofoam containers in one go rather than spending resources to repeat out-reach and education, if and when we eventually ban styrofoam containers. Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback. Regards, Lola Kashyap 1 cc thf Karen B. Guerin / From: Allison Chan [allison©savesfbay.o-g] Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 2:14 PM To: Mark Santoro; Orrin Mahoney; Gilbert Wong; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks Subject: Study session information Dear Mayor Santoro and Councilmembers, I wanted to provide some additional information for your study session today. First, I wanted to give you a list of the 30 Bay Area jurisdictions that have already adopted polystyrene foam (EPS)food ware bans: 1. Alameda (City of) 2. Albany 3. Belmont 4. Berkeley 5. Burlingame 6. Daly City 7. Emeryville 8. Fairfax 9. Foster City 10. Fremont 11. Half Moon Bay 12. Hayward 13. Hercules 14. Marin County 15. Menlo Park (first reading was 7/31) 16. Millbrae 17. Milpitas 18. Oakland 19. Pacifica 20. Palo Alto 21. Pittsburg 22. Portola Valley 23. Redwood City 24. Richmond 25. San Bruno 26. San Carlos 27. San Francisco 28. San Mateo County 29. Sonoma County 30. South San Francisco I also wanted to direct your attention to a recent cost comparison of EPS food ware versus alternative products by the City of San Jose. This staff report from January 3, 2012 shows that alternative products are available within a few cents of EPS products (see pg 13): Table 4: Per Unit Cost Comparison of Food Ware Alterm.tives - - -- -- MATERIAL CUPS ( PLATES .LAMISEIELL EPS $0.035 $0,056 $0.09 Rigid Plastic $0,026 $0.083 50.25 Paper $0,055 $0.02 $0.28 Molded Natural Fiber nt1 $0.064 $0.22 Composlable Plastic S0.07 )0 15 ti(} 1 OC ,th h 2 Karen B. Guerin From: Lola Kashyap [lolakashyap @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 10:08 AM To: City of Cupertino Environmental Division; governmentaffairs @cupertino-chamber.org; City Council Subject: Plastic Bag ban Hi, I am a Cupertino resident and am writing to express my support for a ban on single-use plastic bags similar to cities such as San Jose. I am dismayed by the amount of trash, especially plastic bags that I see when I go running in our Monta Vista neighborhood. This is especially disappointing in a city that boasts of highly educated residents. I am certain that majority of this trash did not get blown out of pick-up truck beds and such...it was tossed by careless people. The issue is especially critical since this trash will pollute ecologically sensitive Permanente Creek before ending up in the bay. I am sure the majority of Cupertino residents have shopped in neighboring San Jose at one time or another since their ban went into effect...we have been "trained" to bring our own bags so implementing a ban would be easier in Cupertino. I strongly recommend that while implementing a ban on single-use plastic bags we should go all the way and ban styrofoam containers as well. It would be less expens'_ve to ban both plastic bags and styrofoam containers in one go rather than spending resources to repeat out-reach and education, if and when we eventually ban styrofoam containers. Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback. Regards, Lola Kashyap i