My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Summary 2002 02 26
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2001-2009 City Council Study Sessions
>
2002 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Summary 2002 02 26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:22:41 AM
Creation date
9/15/2010 9:37:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Supplemental fields
Test
SSSUM 2002 02 26
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Disadvantages <br /> <br /> <br />Requires highest number of trucks & personnel <br /> <br /> <br />Produces highest workers’ comp claims <br /> <br /> <br />Heavy bags, containers must be handled manually <br /> <br />Semi Automated/Fully Automated (can complete 600-800 stops per day) <br /> Advantages <br /> <br /> <br />Requires fewer trucks & personnel <br /> <br /> <br />Produces very low workers’ comp claims <br /> <br />Disadvantages <br /> <br /> <br />Equipment is expensive <br /> <br /> <br />Higher maintenance costs ($18,000-$25,000 per year per truck) <br /> <br /> <br />Requires large public education campaign <br /> <br />Louisville’s options are: <br /> <br /> <br />Free for All <br />Open competition can keep rates down, however, it can also result in infrastructure damage, <br />uncontrolled customer service issues, cost fluctuations, and limited recycling programs. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Contractual Services <br />Allows the City more control (i.e. one vendor or one vendor per district). The drawbacks are <br />that customer service issues would go to the vendor instead of the City, the contract would <br />require staff time to monitor, and extra events such as household hazardous waste and <br />leaf/Christmas tree collection might be more complicated than having the City provide this <br />service. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Providing Citywide Waste Collection Service <br />This allows the City to offer enhanced customer service, and more programs (such as <br />hazardous material, tree limb, motor oil, and battery collection). There is less wear and tear <br />on the City’s infrastructure. All services are paid from collection rates (the City of Longmont <br />rates are $13.73/month for a 96-gallon cart, and $10.84/month for a 40-gallon cart). <br />However, providing citywide waste collection would require the City to develop a solid <br />waste code and there is a high initial investment (Longmont’s initial investment was $5.2 <br />million). <br /> <br />Anne Peters & Robert Tardy presented their findings on the Louisville Yard Waste Processing <br />Options Study. The key points are: <br /> <br />1.By consolidating yard waste operations in one location, the City can prevent dumping by <br />landscapers & non-residents. <br /> <br />2.Creating an Operation & Consolidation Plan for yard waste management for the City would <br />be more efficient and cost effective. <br /> <br /> 2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.