My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2002_0415_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2002
>
2002_0415_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/7/2011 11:28:28 AM
Creation date
10/7/2011 10:58:01 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
121
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
waste generator responsibility for environmentally sound waste management; and 5) <br /> allocate costs fairly to waste generators and users of the solid waste system. <br /> The reason for the study of public collection is that the current system of solid waste <br /> collection and management is not moving the Counties toward the long-term goals. <br /> The report finds: <br /> ■ Waste generation is increasing; <br /> 0 Recycling is stagnant or decreasing as economic incentives to recycle have <br /> diminished; <br /> 0 Resources that could be put to a higher use through recycling are disposed <br /> in processing facilities or landfills; <br /> # Key decisions are made with a focus on short-term cost or profits; <br /> • Illegal dumping of wastes and associated environmental concerns <br /> continues in several areas; <br /> 0 Municipal concerns on truck traffic continue; <br /> • Resource recovery costs are subsidized to compete with landfilling costs; <br /> and <br /> • Resource Recovery capacity is not consistently utilized. <br /> Public Collection Study <br /> The study on public collection consisted of two main elements: 1) research to better <br /> understand public collection, and 2) public engagement, to inform the public about <br /> the solid waste system, challenges related to it, and to get input on the concept of <br /> public collection. <br /> Research consisted of case studies, development of a municipal database, interviews <br /> resulting in city/town histories, a summary of public surveys about waste <br /> management, a resident survey, considerable legal review of waste issues, a review of <br /> illegal dumping issues, research into the advantages and disadvantages of public <br /> collection, and development of a Preliminary Public Collection Framework. The <br /> research is summarized beginning on page 14 of the study, with research results <br /> found in several appendices. <br /> A framework for public collection was developed based on input during the first <br /> phase of public engagement, and the research conducted. The framework is found in <br /> Appendix 16 of the Report. The framework identified seven components that would <br /> guide how public collection would be implemented: <br /> • Protect the environment, health and safety of the community by managing <br /> the waste stream and using waste as a resource; <br /> • Individual communities are provided options for the design of the system in <br /> their community; <br /> • Healthy competition between haulers is maintained; <br /> • Local/independent haulers can stay in business; <br /> • Offer a choice of haulers where the community desires it; fewer haulers on <br /> the street where the community desires it; <br /> Page 2 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.