Kalamazoo County staff recommend larger, relocated household hazardous waste center; board already set $250,000 for design

Planning and public health staff presented a feasibility study July 1 recommending Kalamazoo County seek roughly 12 acres for a new household hazardous waste (HHW) center and use $250,000 already approved by the board for preliminary design work.

The study, delivered by Rachel Grover, Planning and Development Director, and summarized by Health Officer Jim Rutherford, said the county’s current HHW site is under 0.6 acres and has limited parking, staging and sight lines that create safety and operational challenges. Grover said the consultant reports recommend a minimum of 2 acres but that peer communities and operational needs point to about 12 acres for long-term capacity and flexibility.

Why it matters: Commissioners and staff said the existing site has outgrown its original design and that a larger site would improve safety, allow space for truck access and storage, and permit future additions such as handling of lithium-ion batteries and other emerging waste streams.

Details from the presentation: Grover and the consulting team documented current constraints — limited covered drop-off lanes, cramped staff and meeting space, a failing HVAC system and confined staging that requires simultaneous truck operations in tight quarters. A community survey cited by staff noted signage and fencing that some residents found intimidating and confusing. Participation and materials weight collected have generally grown over time; forecasts through 2050 in the study project increased collection needs as population rises.

The presentation identified potential new materials and equipment for a larger facility: densifiers for expanded Styrofoam (EPS) recycling, a baler for plastic film (used by recycling programs such as Trex’s decking feedstock), and temperature‑controlled storage to accept latex paint. Grover noted some vendors currently accept latex paint but that the county lacks the required temperature control on site.

Health Officer Jim Rutherford emphasized the public‑health rationale for investing in a larger, better‑designed facility, saying the center keeps “dangerous products out of our groundwater” and called the county’s program “very well run” but at capacity.

Commissioner discussion and next steps: Commissioners voiced broad support for finding an off‑site location rather than expanding at the current fairgrounds location, citing safety and space limits. Several commissioners urged a robust outreach and advertising program to raise participation; staff and the environmental health manager, Lucas Pols, said existing municipal contract language includes some advertising but that the consultants did not model an expanded advertising campaign and that outreach would likely increase demand beyond current capacity.

Staff identified the immediate next steps as locating and obtaining a suitably sized property (the packet materials recommend ~12 acres), then advancing site design using the $250,000 the board has already approved for capital design work. Grover said site selection should prioritize truck access, visitor parking, clear signage and buffer zones.

Community and partnership notes: Staff pointed to potential regional collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions and township partners and said several grant opportunities for infrastructure exist. Commissioners suggested exploring partnerships with nearby cities and townships to host a larger regional facility.

Ending: Staff will continue site research, return with preferred parcels and cost estimates, and advance schematic design using the capital allocation; the board did not take a final siting vote July 1 but directed staff to continue property identification and planning.