My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-07-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
200x
>
2005
>
2005-07-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 3:57:34 PM
Creation date
9/8/2006 9:57:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/26/2005
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.
/
190
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
<br />Scenario E: Increased education <br /> <br />Education <br />Collection Schedule Bi-Weekly <br />Recycling Containers One 18-gallon bin <br />Number of Households 344 <br />Participation Rate 86.3% <br />1 <br />Avg. Lbs Collected per HH per Route 25.3 <br />2 Environmental 1.9 <br />Most Important Component <br />Resident Satisfaction NA ....... <br />Willing to Pay More NA <br />, Derived from Appendix H Table 3 net average PQundsperhousehold ..... <br />20n a scale of 1 - 4 with 1 being the most imllbrtant <br /> <br />out rate at 72.2%. <br /> <br />Residents in this area were mailed the new <br />educational materials in Appendix A. <br />This scenario tested the effect the <br />educational material alone would have on <br />resident behavior. Participants remained <br />on the every other week collection cycle. <br /> <br />When asked in the pre-survey what would <br />motivate them to recycle more residents in <br />this .area overwhelmingly picked a <br />firiancialrebate. More than 42% of these <br />residents picked the rebate while 25% <br />picked the second most popular option of <br />weekly collection. <br /> <br />Residents in this area were fifth in <br />participation rate in the "before" period at <br />79.5%. They had the second highest <br />increase in participants at 6.8%. But they <br />remained in fifth at 86.3%. <br /> <br />Residents in this area also were fifth in set <br />but rate in the "before" period at 67.7%. <br />They increased 4.5% in the "during" <br />period but remained the second lowest set <br /> <br />Participants incre<ised the a.mo1Jl1tOf recysling put out for collection per person. The mean pounds per <br />household colle.cted went from 21.73 in the "be.fore" period to 25.30 in the "during" period. <br /> <br />The education pieces were well regarged. There were two strong themes that came through in the post- <br />survey: residents found the magnets ha.ndy and easy to use, and residents learned the message of only <br />recycling plastic bottles with.a neck. That appears to be borne out in the composition sort. The "other trash" <br />category that included unwaritedtyjJes of plastic dropped from 2.1 % of the sample in the before period to <br />1.3% in both of the "during" period sorts. Overall the "other trash" in all the two-stream samples stayed <br />roughly the same in all three sorts. One respondent noted that he/she put out less recycling after excluding <br />the unwanted types of plastic. <br /> <br />This area did have a block that was not single-family homes. There were 21 rental towrihomes in a corner of <br />the test area. Rental properties tend to have lower participation rates in part because of the transient nature <br />of these residents (for more on this see the section Observations on Lower Participating Areas). These <br />residents were almost equally divided into the diligent recycler, infrequent recycler and non-recycler <br />categories. Resident behavior did not change after the educational material was mailed to them. <br /> <br />32 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.