My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 01/08/2015
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Parks and Recreation Commission
>
2015
>
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 01/08/2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:56:16 PM
Creation date
1/15/2015 12:26:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Parks and Recreation Commission
Document Date
01/08/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
118
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Strategies to I mprove Communities <br />example from Cartersville, GA embodies parts of <br />each of the action themes. <br />A Case Study in Resident - friendly Recycling <br />Cartersville, Georgia <br />The City of Cartersville, GA had a robust program in <br />place for garbage collection and disposal. Sincethe <br />mid- 1970s, standard services such as curbside pick- <br />up, large item pick -up, and dumpster services had <br />been augmented by extras like bulk leaf vacuuming <br />and grass clipping removal. The City had conducted <br />a pilot recycling program in the late 1990s, but low <br />participation and high costs made further <br />implementation prohibitive. Although there was a <br />rising sensethat the city should provide recycling <br />services, staff were concerned that recycling would <br />require a rate increasethat could upset customers <br />and cause further difficulty. In 2009, Cartersville <br />added aquestion about recycling to its fourth <br />administration of The National Citizen Survey. The <br />survey revealed that 67% of residentswere <br />supportive of including recycling in the city's waste <br />disposal program, even if that change required an <br />additional cost. Based on results from The National <br />Citizen Survey, Cartersville decided thetime was <br />right to implement a recycling program, and set a <br />goal to havethe program in place by the beginning of <br />2012. Before implementing the new recycling <br />program, Cartersvi Ile went through a multi -step <br />planning and implementation processto ensure its <br />su ccess. <br />Envision: The City first identified seven major <br />questions that would need to be resolved: How will <br />recyclable materials be received? What type of <br />containers do you want to use? What type of vehicle <br />will it take? Can our regular collection routes be <br />utilized? How much manpower will it take? How <br />much will this program cost, and how will we pay for <br />it? <br />The Public Works department met with its <br />processing partner, Bartow County Solid Waste, to <br />answer thefirst question. It wasdetermined that a <br />dual stream collection system —with one stream for <br />paper and a separate stream for containers — could <br />be easily integrated into the current structure and <br />would also be sustainable for the foreseeable future. <br />The 2009 National Qtizen Survey asked residents of <br />Cartersville, "To what degree do you support or oppose <br />adding a curbside recycling program, even if it meant an <br />additional collection fee ?" <br />Strongly <br />Strongly <br />Oppose Support <br />17% 33% <br />33% <br />Somewhat <br />Oppose <br />16% <br />Somewhat <br />Support <br />34% <br />Earmark: Next, the Qty needed to determinewhat <br />type of collection containers should be used. Instead <br />of choosing the standard 18- gallon open tubs, <br />Cartersville opted for a container that would be <br />easier for residents and collection staff to handle. <br />The City decided on a smaller version of their <br />garbage collection containers in two colors — dark <br />bluefor containers and light gray for paper. Because <br />recycling wasscheduled for collection every other <br />week, the bins selected were large enough to hold <br />two weeks' worth of recycling for the average <br />household. A complementary recycling vehiclewas <br />selected for its ability to dump these units into a <br />divided body for paper and containers. <br />Educate: The publicwas informed that recycling <br />would be availableto all residentson an opt -in basis, <br />and they were encouraged to sign up to receivethe <br />collection bins. Information about the new program <br />was distri buted in the City's newsletter and sent to <br />residents along with their garbage bills. <br />To facilitate easeof use, asticker displaying thefull <br />year's collection schedule was displayed on the top of <br />each container. Thisway, residents would only have <br />to glance at thetop of their trash binsto determine <br />their next datefor pick -up. <br />Engage: Cartersville's Solid Waste Fund operates <br />as an enterprise fund, and is therefore solely <br />dependent on funds collected within that <br />department to operate. Public Works increased fees <br />by a reasonable $2 per month to generate the funds <br />needed to implement the program. <br />The City also looked at its current five -day pick -up <br />schedule and determined that a biweekly pick -up <br />schedulewould enable the Qty to implement <br />recycling pick -up with minimal additional staff. <br />To add value for this i ncrease, the City also <br />developed and publicized a program called "Reside <br />with Pride." The program includes specific times <br />each year in which solid waste customers can leave <br />© 2014, National Research Center, I nc. Page 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.