2005-07-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Pilot Study Methodolo2V Ramsey County is providing technical assistance to municipalities on recycling issues through a contract with the consulting firm ofR.W. Beck, with Dan Krivit and Associates as subcontractor. The City and County agreed that the County would authorize BecklKrivit to consult with Roseville on design, implementation and analysis of the pilot program methodology. The components that were tested were: . Control, using the current system: Bi-weekly collection, one 18-gallon bin, dual-stream system; . Education: Bi-weekly collection, one 18-gallon bin, dual-stream system, increased education; . Two bins: Bi-weekly collection, two 22-gallon bins with wheels, dua!.stream system; . Weekly: Weekly collection, one 18-gallon bin, dual-streanl systeni; and . Single-stream: Bi-weekly collection, one 64-gallon wheeled part,~ingle-stream system tested in two different neighborhoods. Selection of Pilot Areas Roseville identified pilot areas of 330-370 single-familYe?llles for each componenn()B~tested plus a control route in which there were no changes. The sample si,?~was ba.~.(:d on Waste M<lllagement's calculation of approximately how many homes could be serviced in. one load by a two-stream truck at the 2003 levels of participation. Each area was roughly similar in demographics With()I1~~xception. A~ep()nd single-stream area, called the Contrast area, was selected that featured newer holll.es aIlcllll.p.f~ affluen~residents. The area chosen for the control route had slightly higher income level than ~I. th~?thert~st!l!~as except for the Contrast area. While the pilot areas did not match the d(:m()pr~phics of the city exactly, they were approximately equivalent to each other. The Contrast area is more siIrlilar to some neighboring suburbs. The pilot areas were selected after~revie'Y?fcensus datilpollected primarily through a contract with John Carpenter of ExCensus. A demograpl'1iccompaJjs9l1pfthe areas is available as Appendix B. The areas were~Biead throughol1t~oseville.. One collection area was picked in each of the City's five collection zoneS. for efficiency th~.~econdsil1gle-stream area was selected from the same zone as the original single-strea.111 test area. Are~~. included whole blocks and, for the most part, were contiguous. Time Period For each pilot area, resideI1t~\l:Jehavior was monitored in a two-month "Before" period (June - July 2004) followed by a four-month "During" period (August - November 2004). Data from certain weeks were excluded from the data analysis to avoid bias (the week of July 4 during the "Before" period; the first two weeks of the "During" period, because information had just been sent out to residents of the non-Control pilot areas, and previous studies have shown there is an initial surge of participation that results from direct contact; and, similarly, the last week of the "During" period, because residents had been sent a satisfaction survey). Participation and Set Out Rates City staff drove behind the Waste Management collection truck to record the number of stops and the address of the homes with material set out for collection. This data was entered into an Excel spreadsheet to 13