By Khalida Sarwari
Palo Alto voters on Nov. 8 will decide whether 10 acres of parkland should be undedicated to build a new compost facility.
The city is considering building a processing facility at Byxbee Park to convert yard trimmings, food waste, and other organic waste and sewage sludge from the regional wastewater treatment plant.
The 126-acre park was previously used as a city landfill, but it is now protected as parkland under city charter, which means that it cannot be sold or used for non-park purposes unless a majority of voters decide the property should be undedicated.
The ordinance would remove a 10-acre parcel of land from dedication and change local planning documents, which include amending the property’s comprehensive plan designation, as well as the Baylands Master Plan, and the description of public facility in the zoning ordinance to allow
the city to lease the site to a third party while retaining ownership of the site.
The ordinance would also mandate the facility to include methods for mitigating any significant environmental impacts, including visual, sound and odor impacts. Access to the compost facility would be by Embarcadero Way.
Proponents of the ordinance include Councilman Patrick Burt, former Mayor Peter Drekmeier, and Donald Kennedy, president emeritus at Stanford University. They say building a compost facility is a “financially and environmentally sound alternative” to the current plan for handling organic waste.
The plan in place now involves transporting yard waste to Gilroy. They argue this emits greenhouse gases and incurs steadily higher fuel and disposal costs.
The current plan also incinerates the city’s sewage sludge, which they say uses an estimated $1 million worth of energy annually while releasing harmful emissions.
Based on a feasibility study commissioned by the City Council, proponents say building a compost facility would save Palo Alto at least $18 million over 20 years.
Opponents, on the other hand, argue that taking care of waste locally is “impractical and unattainable.” Mayor Sid Espinosa, Councilman Greg Schmid, and Enid Pearson, a former vice mayor and chair of the Save the Baylands Committee, are among the ordinance’s opponents.
They are against the measure because they say it would sacrifice parkland and that the facility would cost Palo Alto $169 million over 20 years. They argue that the facility would not bring in any profits and the high operating cost could potentially force future public service cuts and
increased refuse rates.
Opponents also cite negative environmental impacts, such as the release of methane from the excavation of old garbage.
They say the initiative to build a compost facility has not undergone a project or approved design or comprehensive environmental review.
If a compost facility is not built on the site within 10 years after the ordinance is passed, the City Council could re-dedicate the site as parkland. The electorate could also vote to re-dedicate the land sooner than 10 years.
