9-27-84 Agenda & Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• ,,,,, ST:LOUIS • PARK 4 yq G� Risking success : .__ .. a460, , . ,..,.$ Recycling _x___ . .a. • works � � = in St. Louis Park - . . -.�. by Craig W. Dawson them at the periphery of the metropol- management study for the city to and Clint Pires itan area. And, some counties have determine which high or low-technolo- planned to build resource recovery gy waste abatement method was the How do you address the two-headed facilities. All of these factors — pollu- most cost effective and environmentally oblem of rising refuse disposal costs tion, siting criteria, more distant land- sound. The firm conducted a random and diminishing landfill space? St. Louis fills, and expensive capital facilities — telephone survey of residents to deter- Park is taking an innovative risk to portend sharply rising costs in solid mine their willingness to accept addi- meet that problem head-on by creating waste disposal. tional costs and inconveniences. a source separation recycling program. While risks exist, translating that Of all the alternatives the survey Through research and survey tech- knowledge into preventative action is identified, people preferred recycling. niques, the city came up with a conve- difficult. Action on a mundane problem Not surprisingly, residents wanted the nient, low-cost program to help people like refuse often doesn't occur until it service to be as inexpensive and con- get in the habit of recycling. A struc- reaches a crisis. In the case of solid venient as possible. tured program of public education, stra- waste, landfill abatement takes place in Because of recycling's track record, tegic implementation, and close moni- two ways: using high-technology facili- city staff and the consultant worked to toring and evaluation led to the ties or changing the behavior of the find a successful program which would project's success. individual resident. The latter is less allow residents' behavior to match their Source separation recycling is a risky expensive, but requires a commitment attitudes supporting recycling. Recy- venture for cities. The first obstacle to to break away from our throwaway cle-3, a successful operation in Santa overcome is convincing people that culture. Rosa, California, offered customers recycling is viable despite its inconsist- three polyethylene containers for ent record of success. source separation and frequent collec- Assessing tion at the residence. This approach Minimizing risks community interest appeared adaptable to St. Louis Park. Choosing not to recycle has easily St. Louis Park is a first-ring suburb A i' program identifiable risks. Landfill capacity and of Minneapolis with a population of p p scarcity have been problems for sev- 43,000. Most of its housing stock went Based on the study recommenda- eral years. A potential for leaching of up during the decade after World War tions, the city began a pilot recycling pollutants from landfills exists. Water is II. Some 12,000 residential units (about program in October 1982. The program a valuable resource — surface water two-thirds of the housing stock) are included 2,200 of the 12,000 single- Ilrecreation and aesthetics; ground- single-family through fourplex dwell- family through fourplex residences in Ler for a potable water supply. In ings. The city currently contracts with three neighborhoods that represented e Twin Cities, the Metropolitan Woodlake Sanitary Service (a BFI sub- a broad cross-section of the city. Council's new sanitary landfill siting sidiary) to provide refuse services. Recyclable collection was twice a criteria have limited the number of In 1982, Pope-Reid Associates corn- month on the same day of the week as potential sites and generally placed pleted a comprehensive solid waste the rest of the refuse pickup in two 4 Minnesota Cities