ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION REFORM COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 2026, AT 11:00 A.M. UNIVERSITY HILLS BRANCH LIBRARY 4721 LOYOLA LN AUSTIN, TEXAS 78723 Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, contact Elizabeth Nelson, 512-974-6492, Elizabeth.Nelson@austintexas.gov. CURRENT [BOARD MEMBERS OR COMMISSIONERS]: Ian Steyaert, Chair; Gerald Acuna; and Seth Whaland AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up [prior*] to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Zero Waste Advisory Commission Construction and Demolition Reform Committee meeting on October 9, 2025. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding construction and demolition recycling and processing facility municipal case studies. Presentation by Elizabeth Nelson, Planner Principal, Austin Resource Recovery. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please contact the Liaison or TTY users’ route through 711. A person may request language access accommodations no later than 48 hours before the scheduled meeting. Please call or email Elizabeth Nelson at Austin Resource Recovery Department, at 512-974-6492 or Elizabeth.Nelson@austintexas.gov, to request service or for additional information. For more information on the Zero Waste Advisory Commission, please contact Gustavo Valle at 512-974-4359 or Gustavo.Valle@austintexas.gov.
Municipal C&D Policies: Case Study ZWAC C&D Committee Austin Resource Recovery | 3/4/2026 Who was included? • Chatham County, NC • Oregon Metro/Portland, OR • • San Francisco, CA Seattle, WA 2 Overview ▪ Austin Resource Recovery staff looked at C&D policies and regulations across 5 city and counties to compare how processing facilities were regulated and how diversion and recovery rates were verified. ▪ All cities/counties studied require C&D processing facilities to be registered or qualified and meet certain requirements. ▪ All cities/counties studied require C&D debris generated within their boundary must be sent to a registered or qualified facility 3 Table Comparison City/County Number of processing facilities Facility min. diversion rate? Required 3rd party verification? City/County Staff Review Pre-construction requirements? Austin, TX Chatham County, NC 4 6 Oregon Metro/Portland, OR* San Francisco, CA 11 14 Seattle, WA 7 No Yes (30%) No No Yes (25%) No Yes Yes No (65% recovery responsibility of contractor) No (cannot have >10% residuals of banned materials) N/A No On-site audit 1x/year, digital report review Yes, C&D Debris Management section on permit application On-site audit 2x/year, scale data review 1x/month No Yes, Pre-project plan No On-site audit 1x/year, digital report review Consultant report 1x/year, digital report review 1x/month 4 Chatham County, NC ▪ Minimum diversion rate (30%) requirement for facilities ▪ Licensed C&D facilities that do not meet the annual 30% minimum requirement may be provided an exemption ▪ The facility must demonstrate practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships to meeting the requirement ▪ Contractors must haul mixed material to a licensed facility ▪ License lasts for 1 year; inspection happens before license expires C&D Debris Management section on permit application: 5 Oregon Metro & Portland, OR ▪ Both entities operate together to regulate facilities (Oregon Metro) and job sites/haulers (City of Portland) ▪ Send debris to a Metro-certified facility ▪ Recover at least 75% of materials from larger projects ▪ Minimum 25% diversion requirement for facilities ▪ 15% processing residuals threshold for wood, metal, and cardboard suspended ▪ All facilities consistently meeting requirements, monitoring no longer necessary ▪ Scale data from facilities automatically uploaded to a database that receives monthly review by Oregon Metro 6 Example Audit Sheet 7 San Francisco, CA ▪ Third party verification required ▪ 3 third-party verifiers available ▪ Transparent facility recovery rate reporting on website ▪ Contractors can make informed choices on where to drop off material ▪ …
