Analysis and Assessment (Basemap) - SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) - Budgetary analysis

 

 

A&A Layers

(Click any image to enlarge)

 

Traffic, Parking and Circulation 

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 4.31.41 PM

 

 Buildings and Infrastructure

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 4.32.02 PM

 

Vegetation, Wildlife, Aesthetics, and Viewshed 

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 4.32.13 PM

 

Landform, Soil and Water 

 Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 4.32.23 PM

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

   

Strengths     

  • social place
  • location
  • size of site (43.65 acres)
  • broad shoulder entrance
  • exposure
  • friendly

 

 

 

  • clean
  • ease of recycling
  • staff
  • single stream
  • reusable items drop-off spot
  • Swap Days

Weaknesses

  • security: from rail trail and too many keys
  • roaring wind tunnel
  • implementation
  • staff--proactivity, physical abilities
  • research capabilities

  • hopper: dangerous
  • no parking delineation
  • aesthetics
  • the overall flow
  • the location for reusable items
  • Swap Day infrequency (1x/month, May-Oct.)

 

 

Analysis and Assessment 

(Click on the image for a larger version)

 

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 4.31.29 PM

  

 

Hours of Operation

Open to the public:

Wednesday and Saturday, 7am-5pm (except holidays); Burn pile: Saturdays only

Other operating hours:

Mondays for 2 hours: Mixed Solid Waste hauling

Once every 3 dump days: Singe Stream Recycling hauling

3-4 times/month: Construction and Demolition Debris hauling

1 time/month: Scrap metal hauling

3 times/year: Tires removed

 

 

Climate  -  History of use  -  Geographical information

(scroll down)

 

 

SWOT Analysis

Comparison of Mixed Solid Waste and Recycling (1984-2014)

Click here to see the interactive chart.

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 8.09.00 PM

Recycling: Costs, revenues, and net (1990-2014)

Click here to see the interactive chart.Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 7.19.37 PM

Single Stream vs. Source Separated in Andover

NRRA data from Jan. 1-July 29, 2014 

  Estimated Source Separated Program 2014 Actual Single Stream Program YTD 2014
Total Revenue/Cost: $6,220 ($2,741)
Transportation costs ($40/ton): ($4,400) ($7,200)
Net Revenue/Cost: $1,820 ($9,941)
Revenue/Cost per ton $16.55/ton ($90.38)/ton

 

 

MSW and Recycling Costs

 

 This first graph shows a comparison between mixed solid waste (MSW)--general household garbage--and the net costs of recycling (which can be seen in more detail in the graph below). Tipping and hauling fees have increased dramatically at the Concord Regional Solid Waste/Resource Recovery Cooperative Incinerator in Penacook, NH--a Waste to Energy (WTE) plant--as have our pounds-per-person of MSW generated in Andover. Meanwhile, recycling revenues grew as Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) developed their technologies and marketability of recyclables.* In 2013, however, Andover switched from "source separated" recycling (where items sorted into glass, plastic, fibers, aluminum, tin…) to single stream recycling (SSR) or "zero-sort" as it is sometimes called. Due to a growing number of towns switching to single stream, MRFs have been overloaded with material and have begun charging for pickup and sorting services. There is no longer revenue from the Town's recyclables. However, we are seeing a decrease in tonnage of MSW most likely due to the ease of recycling. According to T.S. attendant Reggie Roy, we have jumped from 50% recycling compliance to 67%. 

This has negative effects financially. According to Andover's NRRA representative Marilyn Weir, the Town is now spending $90/ton of SSR whereas $16/ton of revenue could have been made had we stayed source separated. The Town spends $68/ton of MSW which means it is fiscally more responsible to throw recyclables in the garbage.** Click here to see the comparison of source separated and single stream recycling (SSR) costs.

The comparison of Andover's SSR and source-separated costs/revenues can be seen below the graph to the right.

 

*this is also due to joining the Northeast Resource Recovery Association.

**data from Annual Town Reports and  NRRA year-to-date Activity Reports

Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D)

Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) is one of the Transfer Station's biggest annual expenses. Andover has many construction businesses and offers disposal with the following fees:

In-town Material: $70/yd
Out-of-Town Material: $80/yd
8ft Truck bed:
Full: $121
3/4 Full: $96
1/2 Full: $60.50
1/4 Full: $30.25
6ft Truck bed:
Full: $82.50
3/4 Full: $61.86
1/2 Full: $41.25

According to the T.S. attendants, it is difficult to be consistent when charging for this service and there are frequent complaints from townspeople. The Town has been in the negatives four (4) times and has come within $1,000 of breaking even eight (8) times out of twenty-three (23) years. In 2014, the Town spent $5,385 due to incommensurate fees.

 

 

 

Another issue is tonnage. With no covers for containers, rain and snow add weight that the Town pays for. The containers fit an average of 3-4 tons of C&D, whereas Transfer Stations with backhoes or other crushing equipment can fit 10-12 tons. Hauling costs are at $185/container with an additional $79/ton hauled. This amounts to approximately $420-500/haul. In 2014, we shipped out 41 containers of C&D, with more loads in the summer months (up to 6/month, averaging 3.4/month). This amounts to an average of $1500-$1700/month spent on C&D. 

Much of the material being thrown in the containers is still usable--doors, windows, dimensional lumber, et cetera. As C&D contains materials harmful to human health and the environment (i.e. asbestos, PCBs, lead paint, and chemicals found in wood treatment and glues)*,  there are serious ecological implications that should be considered in the redesign.

*from NHDES Best Management Practices for NH Solid Waste Facilities Manual

Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D): Costs, revenues, and net (1992-2014)

Click here to see the interactive chart.

Screen Shot 2015-01-30 at 10.14.48 AM

Commentary

The Analysis and Assessment (A&A) process was an incredibly challenging and exciting one. I digested much information in two short months and felt that every angle I explored or piece I connected opened door after door. Fractal growth and connectivity were key elements in this information web. Understanding the psychology, mechanics, functions, appearance, habits, money, markets, regulations, and history became a game of unending questions and varying answers. This was by far the most interesting part of the project, though I still feel as though I have only a small fraction of the puzzle.