My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-02-23_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
2016-02-23_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/28/2016 10:14:19 AM
Creation date
3/28/2016 10:14:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/23/2016
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
Mr. Culver noted that the frequency question was intended to be built into the <br /> upcoming 2016 community survey as well to inform the RFP; with options <br /> included in the RFP for final deliberation and determination of the City Council. <br /> Review of Last Month's Discussion <br /> A brief review of last month's PWETC discuss ensued, including current and <br /> proposed pick-up frequency and whether occurring between regular routes or at <br /> an extra charge;possibility of more than one cart per home, but recognizing the <br /> limited garage sizes and available storage space for many older Roseville single- <br /> family homes; and city code requirements for storage out-of-site. <br /> Chair Stenlund sought clarification as to whether park pick-ups would be a <br /> separate zone unto itself or embedded into one of the five existing zones. <br /> Mr. Johnson responded that the RFP would include that option for contractors and <br /> include routine pick-ups whether on the trails requiring a smaller truck or <br /> relocated by city staff to a central collection point depending on the park and/or <br /> trail accessibility. <br /> Member Wozniak noted that the current contractor does not separate multi-family <br /> zoning or collections. <br /> Mr. Johnson reported that the rationale of Eureka Recycling is to keep those <br /> multi-family collections separated from single-family units to allow tracking <br /> materials to determine participation rates among various housing stock types. Mr. <br /> Johnson noted that the city could not really stipulate whether or not a vendor <br /> chose to keep that separation going forward. <br /> Member Cihacek opined that the city should not dictate that for contractors, nor <br /> require that a special trip be made for a designated pick-up point. However, <br /> Member Cihacek suggested the RFP should provide an opportunity for the vendor <br /> to describe their preference or value added. <br /> Mr. Culver also noted that for park pick-up, it required coordination of park <br /> maintenance staff with the contractor; but agreed that at the very start, the vendor <br /> should signify the most effective way to accomplish pick-ups. <br /> Specific to parks as a separate zone, Chair Stenlund clarified that he had no <br /> problem with the current zoned collections, but was seeking to differentiate it <br /> separately. <br /> Mr. Johnson advised that he would clarify the RFP accordingly. <br /> Specific to curbside collection of residential organics (pages 18-19), Member <br /> Cihacek asked if the vendors would provide their options; with Mr. Johnson <br /> Page 10 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.