Core Value #2: The University District shall be a place of pride by maintaining buildings, and conserving and enhancing architectural quality and character.

This is one of three chapters that address the character, integrity, and visual quality of the Neighborhoods. Issues surrounding code enforcement, the degradation of the open space, and accumulation of trash, litter, and graffiti can have a profound effect on the quality of life for the residents, and accelerate the decline of the Neighborhoods. In addition, a poorly perceived image can send a negative image to potential students and faculty desiring to live in the Neighborhoods, as well as potential investors in residential and commercial property. The issues and recommendations suggested in each of these areas are critical to the success of the revitalization concept.

Perhaps one of the most essential services in any inner-city neighborhood is the removal of trash. Due to the high proportion of rental units and constant turnover of those units, trash collection and removal of bulk items such as old couches and other discarded furniture is magnified. In addition, with the increase in blighted properties in the Neighborhoods has come graffiti and litter of both private and public property. Constant monitoring of the visual quality of the Neighborhoods is essential to restoring a clean, attractive community. The recent street cleaning activities are an example of the initial actions that will serve as the foundation for the recommendations included within this concept, as addressed in Chapter 4.0.

While the problem of increased trash in the Neighborhoods has many causes, it is essential that the problem be solved. The perception among most residents and students who live in the area is that the problem has worsened, creating a negative image. To attract investment to the University District, the streets, alleys, and buildings must be regularly cleaned and maintained. Recent success in developing a street cleaning program is an example of positive change.

This chapter examines not only the issue of trash collection, but also City policies and programs on bulk refuse collection, litter of public and private property, and graffiti concerns. The following objectives guide the policies and recommendations of trash/solid waste collection:

Recommendation 4.1.1: The city of Columbus should provide twice weekly trash collection in the Neighborhoods, particularly during the school year (September to June).

Recommendation 4.1.2: Increase the frequency of bulk collection on a seasonal basis coinciding with changes in the university schedule.

Recommendation 4.1.3: The City should evaluate alternatives to its waste container registration program due to the difficulty in enforcing the current ordinance.

Recommendations 4.1.4: Designate a person responsible for refuse container and repair in the Neighborhoods within the Division of Refuse Collection.

Recommendations 4.1.5: Encourage continued funding within the City’s Division of Refuse Collection for vehicle replacement and acquisition.

Recommendations 4.1.6: Establish a Solid Waste Service Fee Structure with revenues dedicated to funding solid waste/trash/and garbage collection services. Any fees should be comprehensive and equitable.

Recommendations 4.2.1: The City should enact legislation that restricts deposition of litter on private and public property.

Recommendations 4.2.2: The City should review existing code requirements relating to deposition of litter and increase the requirements and penalties where appropriate.

Recommendations 4.2.3: Institute policies and programs to address graffiti on public and private property.

Recommendations 4.3.1: Establish a code enforcement program with authority in the Refuse Collection division related to Solid Waste Management.

Recommendations 4.3.2: The city of Columbus should review its present functional department structure for the regulation of health, environmental, waste, building codes and inspections and assess the potential to combine programs for better efficiency and effectiveness.

The city of Columbus provides solid waste collection services to residences and properties as defined by classes of services delineated in the Columbus City Code. These classes of services may be broadly categorized as single-family residential structures, multi-family residential structures, rooming/boarding houses, multi-unit residential structures, and some businesses.

The City provides solid waste collection services through the Department of Public Service. The Division of Refuse Collection was established as a unit of the Department of Public Service with its primary duty being the collection of refuse. The City Code includes specific requirements for the responsibility, control, storage, and collection of solid waste by generators of waste materials and delineates the responsibilities of the City for the collection of these waste materials. The code also includes specific requirements, with respect to waste materials, for persons living, working, and doing business in the city of Columbus.

The Department of Public Service is organized into several divisions and is responsible for the delivery of a multitude of public services, including street maintenance and construction, traffic engineering, capital works engineering and construction, street cleaning, street sweeping, City engineering and permitting functions, and refuse collection. The Division of Refuse Collection of the Public Service Department has the primary responsibility for the collection of refuse within the corporate limits of the city of Columbus. The Division has a total staff of 271 full-time employees and 59 part-time employees. The Division's 1996 operating budget or Continuing Service Estimate is over $19.4 million. Its Capital Improvements budget (purchase of equipment and containers) is over $3.2 million.

Refuse collection is structured on a geographical basis to provide the waste collection services mandated by the code. It currently operates from four installations, including the Alum Creek Road Facility, which serves as headquarters for the Division; the Georgesville Road; the Morse Road Facility; and the Marion Road Facility. The Morse Road Facility provides collection services from 90- and 300-gallon containers in the University District. The Georgesville Road Facility provides box collection services for this same area. The Division provides collection services along with other providers of these services.

The University District is somewhat unique in that it contains The Ohio State University, with a large off-campus student population residing close to the university. In the past, residents and business owners/operators have expressed concerns regarding the level of trash generation and accumulation in the university area. Field surveys of the university area resulted in the conclusion that there is justification and validity with the assertions of trash as a major problem and indicated that the level of trash accumulation in the area may be higher than desirable during normal times, and especially during changes in the academic periods of the university.

Some of the concerns expressed have related to, among others, overflowing box containers with adjacent build-up of trash, trash accumulation around the 300-gallon containers, proliferation of bulk materials in alleys during certain periods, random deposition of waste materials in alleys, trash and litter on the streets, and vacant lots in the area.

Over time many of those affected have expressed numerous reasons for the current problems. These include:

• The transient population resulting from residency of students in the area.
• Conversion of previous single-family residences to multi-residences for students.
• Proliferation of rooming houses in the area.
• Absentee landlords, who apparently do not control or manage the waste problem.
• Personal habits of students who may not feel a commitment to the area.
• Perceived lack of regular waste collection by public and private entities.
• Random "dumping" by commuters and others traveling through the area.
• Disposal of waste by nearby business owners who may not have required containers.
• Lack of capacity of front-box containers in use by residential and business owners.

The requirements specifically related to the University District may be somewhat unique but are in response to the special circumstances resulting from the higher-than-usual residential density in the area and the cyclical nature of waste generation associated with the changes in academic schedules at The Ohio State University.

The requirements for determining container capacity based on gross area of the building or dwelling appear to be reasonable considering the characteristics of the university area, and the fact that structures in the area have increased contribution to the waste stream. However, certain parameters included in the requirements and the formula for determining container size may need to be reviewed to reflect present actual and assumed residential and population density conditions in the University District. Throughout the area, there are external indications of changes in use of structures which previously served single-family residential, but now serve as residential housing for students. Specific data are not readily available on past conversions and the present density of the student population residing in previous single-family residences or properly zoned and constructed multi-family residential structures.

Considering the present requirements of the solid waste management code, the study has found a need for selective revisions of certain code sections; additional code enforcement responsibilities; further definition and delineation of environmental violations as they specifically relate to solid waste management; provision of increased monitoring and enforcement of the requirements imposed on property owners, tenants, occupants of residential structures and businesses in the study area.

The code is not specific on the issue of disposal of bulk waste. It may be that this section relating to the preparation of bundled waste excludes any items beyond those considered. However, given the specific problems that have been identified with the disposal of bulk materials in the university area, the code should contain specific requirements on the responsibilities for collection and disposal of bulk materials.

In addition to the problems noted above with trash/solid waste accumulation and collection, there have been some concerns expressed with increasing litter along expressways and streets in the City; graffiti on public facilities, such as bridges; and the random dumping of waste materials on vacant, and in some cases, developed lots in the city.

The Refuse Collection Division provides collection services to the residents in this area. This service is currently provided through distribution and servicing 300- and 90-gallon containers and dumpsters or box containers. The 300-gallon containers, provided by the City, are usually placed in alleys and used for service to multi-unit structures with four or less units. The 90-gallon containers, provided by the City, furnish service to single residential structures from the curbside using semi-mechanized rear loading equipment. The 300-gallon containers are picked up by a mechanized system utilizing a one-person crew. A one-person crew does not facilitate any efforts to clean up spillage from around the container, resulting in build-up of waste that citizens perceive as a lack of service.

Dumpster containers provide service to multiple-unit structures. The City services these container units once per week. The capacity of some of these containers has been identified as a problem. Any property owner who owns containers that requires servicing more than once per week contracts with private haulers for additional collection service.

The City has recently instituted two programs to improve the capacities and identification of owners of these containers. The City has modified its code to include a method of computing required containers using a formula based on total floor area and number of dwelling units. The City also initiated a survey to identify the owners of existing containers, the number of dwelling units, the capacity of containers, and the required capacity based on floor area of the structure. The focus will be to identify all dumpsters in the university area and Citywide to develop a computer database to determine sufficient capacity and subsequent remedial action.

Bulk items deposited in the alleys are a major problem. To some extent, generation of bulk waste seems to be cyclical, and dependent on timing of student move-ins and move-outs during changes in the university’s academic periods. The Division does not have sufficient crews to handle this problem at present. It was also indicated that the disposal of items having CFCs (e.g., refrigerators, dehumidifiers, air conditioners, etc.) are the responsibility of property owners. The consensus is that landlords should hire commercial firms to clean and dispose of bulk materials in conjunction with move-in and move-out activities.

The Refuse Collection Division has been (and is currently) assigning additional resources to the university area to provide twice-per-week collection services during the periods September-October and March-June. These efforts, to date, have been successful, with a noticeable decrease in the level of waste and bulk accumulation in the study area.

The student population distribution and density may contribute to a higher-than-normal waste volume from converted single-family structures to multiple units. This situation will in all likelihood continue. Any changes to the present system of waste collection should recognize this fact and provide for handling the increased waste stream from the student population in addition to the cyclical deposition of various bulk items.

The Refuse Collection Division has experienced some problems in the past with lack of adequate equipment availability. These problems have been solved through the procurement of new equipment during the past two years. In addition, the City has established a five-year equipment replacement schedule for waste collection vehicles. The existing vehicle replacement program and the recommendation relating thereto is intended to ensure that the City establish and continually fund a scheduled replacement for refuse collection vehicles. The equipment replacement program and the funding thereof should be continuing and not subject to annual budget reviews or competition with other critical municipal funding needs.

The Refuse Collection Division does not have code enforcement responsibilities. Enforcement of refuse problems is performed by the Health Department. The division now has three staff positions (1995) who are assigned to identify violations and work with the Health Department in enforcement activities. One of these positions is assigned to the Morse Road District which includes the university area. The division has been meeting with the Health Department on a regular weekly basis to coordinate and facilitate the enforcement activities between these departments. Given the enforcement problems identified in the study area, the university area could easily support the assignment of a full-time Solid Waste Inspector to the area.

Funding for waste collection service is provided from the General Fund. There is no present refuse collection or sanitation fee and no revenues dedicated to their services. Refuse Collection must compete with all other City services for adequate funding.

In many municipalities, funding for waste/refuse collection and disposal services is based on the utilization and requirements for the services provided. That is, those who use the services pay the costs thereof in a commensurate and equitable fashion.

The Environmental Court has capacity to handle more enforcement actions. The court is now operating at less than full capacity. According to reports received, few health-related issues are presented to the court. Additional staff in the Departments of Health and Public Service may effect a shift in the number of cases presented to the court. The court is a resource that could be used to facilitate and enhance the enforcement of laws and regulations relating to environmental matters under the purview of these departments.

For approximately 15 months the City has been providing twice-per-week collection in the university area during the periods of September/October and March through June. Residents and neighborhood groups have recognized and spoken positively of the improved service. Field studies of waste loads on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis have identified July and August as low generation months. Second collections are not required during these two months. This initiative should be continued and funded on an annual basis.

The Department has proceeded to provide such increased frequency of bulk collection, albeit within existing budget allocation. This increased service level should be as a basic City service policy with adequate funding and resources provided to the department to ensure the routine and scheduled collection of bulk materials during appropriate periods.

Given the characteristics of the area, it is recommend that two additional bulk crews be added to the area. By adding two additional bulk crews to the crews currently servicing this area, it is felt that the Refuse Collection Division will be able to substantially improve overall bulk collections in the area. In addition to collecting bulk, it is recommended that the bulk crews clean up spillage around dumpsters and 300-gallon containers.

Landlords and operators of student residential properties should be involved in the coordination and scheduling of residential "change-outs" which contribute to peak generation of bulk materials. The City should continue or initiate discussions with the Apartment Owners Association and property managers to create a cooperative liaison. Apartment owners should be encouraged to use roll offs or dumpsters with private haulers handling the removal of construction materials and bulk items associated with renovations.

As worded, the City has experienced difficulty in enforcing this ordinance and the Public Service Department is currently revising Title 13 of the Columbus City Codes to address all refuse-related issues, including a Citywide container registration program. Some suggestions currently being discussed are revising the formula to base capacity on maximum number of occupants per dwelling and/or basing the capacity on the number of dwellings units. Solid Waste Inspection personnel may be used in the future to facilitate the enforcement provisions of this program. An annual dumpster decal renewal program is currently being developed to work in conjunction with the container registration program.

During spring and summer, it is recommended that the container and repair person provide a minimum of one cleaning and sanitizing of each 300-gallon container in the area.

The City implemented a five-year replacement program for waste collection vehicles, currently projected through the year 2000. The City should continue this program and ensure that funding is available to finance replacement of refuse collection vehicles beyond the presently scheduled program.

The Department of Public Service has indicated a willingness to initiate a review of the feasibility of a fee-based structure for refuse collection services. The Department anticipates that such a feasibility study could be completed in approximately 24 months.

The City should consider the review of the current litter code (2324.01, Littering, unauthorized use of litter receptacle, of the Health, Safety and Sanitation Code) and/or enhancement of the existing legislation to prohibit littering on public and private property and assign responsibility for monitoring, control, and abatement to the Department of Health.

Proposed ordinance enhancements could be based on a declaration of excessive litter as a health problem, a continuing nuisance, and violations of certain environmental standards established by State and local laws. Such legislation has been successful in other jurisdictions but may be dependent on the powers and authorities granted to the City under its charter.

The City can pursue alternative efforts to control, regulate, and abate littering on private and public property. Some of these include the following:

• Consider legislation relating to the deposition and accumulation on private property as the responsibility of the property owner.
• Consider legislation that would classify littering on public and private as a misdemeanor with penalties appropriate to this offense.
• Create monitoring and enforcement resources in the Department of Health with responsibility for review and enforcement of enacted code requirements relating to the deposition of litter on public and private property and excessive vegetative overgrowth on public and private properties.

The City should review existing code requirements related to litter and increase the requirements and penalties where appropriate. It should be noted, however, that laws and regulations in and of themselves are not an effective tool in reducing litter. The most effective mechanism has been the establishment and availability of resources that could be dispatched to abate problems that have been discovered.

Considering experiences in the area of highway litter, the most effective solution is the creation of resources to abate littering along with an intensive campaign to raise public awareness of the cost of littering on the streets and highways of any city. Columbus has pursued an educational program and attempts to involve the public in an anti-littering attitude. Columbus' program is called "Roadside Rainbow" and is structured to solicit organizations, civic associations, and companies to: (1) design, construct, and maintain landscape areas; (2) maintain landscape areas; or (3) have a program to remove litter from major sections of the roadway.

The Department of Trade and Development's Division of Development Regulations would appear to be the organization best suited to address graffiti on private property. This division currently has enforcement responsibility and its Environmental Blight Abatement group deals with similar issues in the community. It is recommended that the Public Service Department's Engineering and Construction Division continue their program of graffiti removal from bridges and overpasses.

The creation of new or use of existing resources to monitor and remove graffiti could be an additional cost to the delivery of services. However, given the concerns that have been expressed, this is an area that should be considered for the allocation of necessary resources. Proliferation of graffiti, whether on private or public property can only be viewed as negative and a detriment on the viability of the area in question.

Currently, personnel of the Refuse Collection Division identify waste and trash violations and report these to the code enforcement personnel of the Health Department who prepare cases for the City Attorney's office for presentation to the Environmental Court. This procedure has worked reasonably well in the past; however, considering the increasing problems associated with the proliferation of trash, random dumping on vacant and developed lots, and other expressed concerns, the Department of Public Service should have internal authorities, responsibilities, and resources to address problems and initiate code enforcement activities relating to its area of operations.

The Departments of Health and Public Service have recently added staff to increase enforcement in the areas of solid waste code violations. In addition, these departments have been meeting to ensure appropriate inter-departmental coordination of activities in the area of code requirements relating to refuse and solid waste. The Department of Public Service concurs with the need to establish enforcement authorities in the department and to include one additional Solid Waste Inspector as referenced in the Summary of Finding and Analysis section.

It is recommended that the city of Columbus review its present functional departmental structure for the regulation of health, environmental, waste, building codes, and inspections and assess the potential for combining these, or alternatively creating an advisory or review committee to evaluate a more efficient and effective method of coordinating and carrying out the enforcement provisions of the present code.