Sunnyvale examines bulky-item pickups for multifamily housing; pilot found low initial uptake, staff seeks $640,000 for rollout

Sunnyvale city staff presented a proposal Feb. 25 to extend the city's bulky‑item collection service to multifamily dwellings, saying a six‑month pilot showed need but that initial resident signups were limited.

The pilot, run April 1–Sept. 30, included 19 multifamily properties chosen to reflect Sunnyvale's housing stock and areas with higher illegal dumping, Solid Waste Programs Division Manager Shekha Gupta told the council. "So we conducted the pilot during April 1 to September 30," Gupta said. Under the pilot each participating property received two appointments per unit and two items per appointment; allowed items included mattresses, bed frames, large electronics, furniture and large exercise equipment.

City staff recommended a program that would mirror the existing single‑family service in most respects: two bulky‑item appointments per unit per year with two items allowed per appointment, and an online appointment tool. For very large complexes (250 units or more) staff recommended weekly collection timed with regular trash service rather than appointment pickups.

Why it matters: staff emphasized the city lacks a municipal bulky pickup service for multifamily units, a gap that staff and the council said contributes to illegal dumping. Gupta said neighboring cities that offer no‑cost pickup have reduced illegal dumping; other nearby jurisdictions charge per item (Los Altos about $20/item, Milpitas about $59, Campbell/Los Gatos about $98/pickup but permitting more items per pickup).

Pilot findings and outreach: Gupta reported 51 individual collections and 86 items removed over the pilot. Property managers generally were supportive, and staff learned that fourplex managers preferred tenants be allowed to schedule appointments directly rather than having only property managers call. A 23% response rate to a post‑pilot property‑manager survey showed a mix of preferences about who should schedule appointments and requests for an automated online scheduler.

Costs and rollout: staff estimated recurring annual costs in the range of SFD baseline costs and a high‑level program estimate of about $640,000; the city would need a dedicated bulky‑item vehicle and two drivers plus software implementation and an annual automation fee (staff cited an implementation and $24,000 annual charge for the appointment system). Gupta said staff will propose including the program funding in the FY2025‑26 budget and will conduct 5–6 months of outreach between July and December if the budget is approved.

Operational details and risks: staff proposed that property managers or tenants be able to schedule; larger complexes would be given weekly collection. Gupta said the city would ask large complexes to transition away from third‑party haulers (which city code does not allow). Council members pressed staff on route optimization, how the city would handle capacity if a large complex generated many items, and how the city would limit inclusion of regular trash (staff proposed keeping the program focused on bulk items and not permitting extra bagged garbage). Council member Mollander urged that the city prepare a clear one‑page fact sheet in multiple languages for landlords and tenants.

Next steps: staff will continue outreach with property managers and include the high‑level budget request in the FY2025‑26 proposal; if the budget is approved staff will work with the appointment vendor and begin outreach aiming for collections to start after December. The proposal did not require a council vote at the Feb. 25 study session and will return as part of the budget process.

Ending note: Council members generally welcomed the proposal and encouraged multilingual outreach and clear guidance for property managers about pickup staging locations.