Decision Points - All Comments

re: City to implement $58 million, 5-year traffic improvement program

Will Hampton — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 22:20:44 GMT

@NewAgeGlobalConsulting,

There currently is no effort by the City to participate in the Lone Star Rail project. The City has never participated financially in the project, which was originally known as the Austin-San Antonio (ASA) Intermunicipal Rail District. The financial feasibility of the project – a 112-mile system with 15 stations – was considered questionable by the City staff and City Council. Cost and ridership assumptions were also deemed questionable. For example, the rail district forecast that by 2030, there would be more weekday boardings in Round Rock than downtown San Antonio. You can watch a 2007 presentation to the City Council on transit planning – including the ASA project – online here: roundrock.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php.

More recently, the City and Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority partnered on a study to determine the feasibility of regional rail. The City specifically looked at connecting to the Capital Metro Red Line. Cost to build the connection was estimated at $340 million, with $7.3 million in annual operational costs. You can watch the May 13, 2010, presentation to the City Council on the study results online here: roundrock.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php.

re: City to implement $58 million, 5-year traffic improvement program

NewAgeGlobalConsulting — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 21:07:48 GMT

What are the efforts for Round Rock to be included in the Lone Star Rail project that will cover commuting from Georgetown to San Antonio down the I-35 corridor? After attending a meeting with A4APT (Alliance for Austin Public Transportation) and hearing the lack of involvement and interest shown by the city of Round Rock and Williamson County per Director, Joe Black I am curious as to the reason why we as a city and county are not a member or being represented in this project but Georgetown has expressed interest along with every other city along the corridor this rail will service. Were there ever any community outreach or public engagement initiatives?

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

Will Hampton — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 15:28:03 GMT

@e149 Here's a response from Michael Thane, Utilities and Environmental Services Director:

Prior to the new program, the City was recycling about 3 percent of the solid waste generated in the City from residential customers. With the new program, we are now recycling about 15 percent of the solid waste generated. This number should continue to rise going into the future as we continue to promote recycling and why it is important to reduce the amount of waste going to the landfill.

The landfill disposal rates will continue to go up in the future. This new program promotes recycling. As the City recycles more, we should receive more revenue from the sale of commodities. The City is in discussion now about how do give that money back to our customers. One possibility is providing a “recycling credit” on your utility bill. More to come on this in the near future.

For as long as we can remember, the City was providing twice-a-week pickup for our residents. We began talking about this new program of once a week trash and either once a week recycling or every other week recycling back in 2008. Because of the cost of buying the containers and the perception that we are providing less service (twice a week vs once a week trash pickup), the City was diligent in developing the best program for our City. We conducted a pilot study for about 6 weeks to evaluate the new program. Then the commodity market dropped, so we delayed implementation for a little while. It is difficult to determine the wear on our streets, but by reducing the number of days, there are fewer trips on our streets with the new program.

We heard your concern about odor from many when the program first came out. The containers do not have to be stored in the garage. Many citizens store them on the side of their house, behind their privacy fence. We have not been hearing many complaints about this issue lately.

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

e149 — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 19:30:03 GMT

472/3500 = 13.5% or let me say 15%.

So we have turned our homes/neighborhoods into landfills by having to keep trash there twice as long for a measly 15% not going into the landfill. How much was recycled before you made all of us do it?

“New residential trash, recycling program went into effect January 2011

The Round Rock City Council voted unanimously Thursday, Aug. 26, to implement a new recycling program beginning in January 2011. Under the new program, Round Rock Refuse will provide residents with two 96-gallon containers, one for garbage and one for recycling. Garbage will be collected once per week and recycling collected every other week. The new monthly rate for residential customers is $16.91 (pre-tax). [Pay more for less. Why? That is our city council hard at work for us.]

Diverting waste from landfills has become a bottom line issue as well as an environmental one. [You want the growth but aren’t willing to pay for the bad that that causes. Why was trash ever picked up twice a week if once was sanitary, like apparently it is now?] Landfill costs doubled in 2009 [Why? If the rates doubled in 2009, then why did you not implement this in 2008 or 2009? Why did you wait until 2 years later? Ah yes, that is city planning at its finest.] and will continue to increase 5 percent a year for the next three years. [Was does that have to do with this? The amount recycled is minor. So we are paying to recycle instead of get paid for recycling?] In addition to reducing the amount of unnecessary material going into landfills, the new program will save significant wear and tear on City streets as garbage trucks will make fewer trips.” [OMG: 3 garbage trucks instead of 4 every two weeks. Wow quite a savings there. And yet we are paying more for less service. Actually you did have voluntary recycling before. Now these trucks just go everywhere instead of just a few places. This makes the trucks’ impact just that much worse. For garbage for example—how many trips did the trucks have to make when the garbage was half as much as it is now (picked up twice a week as opposed to more trash once a week?) Actually, for example, instead of making say 3 trips twice a week they make 6 trips once a week. How does that save wear and tear on the streets? They sill have to pick up just as much garbage per week. Then they make a special trip just pick up 15% or less, 26 times a year? Can I bill the city for cleaning up flies, roach, mouse, rat, and other critter infestations that may occur now that garbage stands around my house and everyone’s house as well for a full week instead of just 3 or 4 days? Can I bill them for deodorizing the area because of the increased stench?]

Also, you want us to store this garbage in our garages? God can yo imagine stench then. It is bad enough outside.

re: City Council calls election to expand uses of economic development sales tax

e149 — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 19:23:40 GMT

This city's government never will learn. We have already rejected this once.

Again, there are roads that need improvement in neighborhoods and other roads in the city. If we have excess money for roads repair these roads or give us the money back. Or perhaps lower the tax.

re: City to implement $58 million, 5-year traffic improvement program

e149 — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:58:43 GMT

Project 1----You have an exit ramp northbound just south of US79 and you want another one just north of US79. Closing the entrance ramp to I-35 at US79 forcing traffic to go to almost FM3406 just to get on the I-35 North?

On the southbound side you going to force people to exit just south of FM 3406 to turn onto US79.

You have succeeded in making it harder (more inconvenient) to enter I-35 Northbound and exit I-35 southbound.

What is bad is I fail too see how this makes it any safer.

You have just increased traffic on the frontage road in both directions.

On top of that we will have detours and road construction for 3-5 years, or at least 18 months. GREAT!!!!

Project 2---- I would say that the FM 3406 project is needed for worse than the aforementioned project (which I see as not needed at all). Although I am not so sure that U-turn lanes are all that critical. Most want to either enter the interstate or turn onto FM 3406.

Project 3—I do not understand it all.

Project 4--- Reversing ramps again and widening the frontage road from FM 3406 to RM 1431? Widening the frontage road here? I do not see the reason for it, unless of course you do reverse the ramps, but what is the need to reverse the ramps as I said the first project?

Project 5---- Overpass improvements for RM 1431. Do you mean widen RM 1431 (not FM 3406). Basically do to RM1431 what you plan on doing to RM 3406?

I can see increased problems on I-35 for nearly of these proposed “improvements”. I mean not only will construction adversely affect US 79, Fm 3406, and RM 1431, but I-35 at these intersections as well.

These projects will not even start for 3-4 years.

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

Christy — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 17:40:36 GMT

Dear Round Rock Refuse,

I am one of your customers and I’m writing to express my interest in becoming part of the Recyclebank rewards program. This program will allow my household and others in my neighborhood to receive rewards, like groceries, merchandise and discounts to local businesses, for recycling at home. I think this is an important program for the environment, your customers and your business.

By adding the Recyclebank program to your list of services you will have a unique offering over and above other service providers in our area. Plus, I would happily recommend my trash/ recycling program to neighbors and friends if we got rewarded for recycling.

Please consider giving your customers the Recyclebank program as it will most certainly keep me a satisfied customer and one that is loyal to your services.

Recyclebank partners with communities in dozens of other ways. Learn more by emailing them at hauler@Recyclebank.com.

I’m looking forward to your response – and to hopefully seeing the Recyclebank rewards program in our neighborhood soon!

Sincerely,

Christy

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

Christy — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 17:35:25 GMT

I am thrilled that the new recycling program with the 96 gallon containers is in place. It feels great to finally be able to recycle glass also. We fill our container to the brim and it's nice knowing that we are helping conribute to a better environment. As always, Round Rock leads the way on staying on top of current trends.

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

ilene — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:54:03 GMT

The Mayor and City Council have really let the people of Round Rock down in a big way by turning our neighborhoods into big dump sites where dumpsters can sit on the curb 24/7.

The city has no provision to protect neighborhoods from neighbors who leave their city-issued dumpsters on the street. Austin has rules that say trash cans are allowed on the street only on the day of pickup. Why doesn't Round Rock have this protection?

The city says it wants to help declining neighborhoods but is taking no action to do it. Letting trash cans sit on the street 24/7 is an example of that. These trash cans are blight on neighborhoods.

Neighborhoods with deed restrictions, such as HOAs, aren't concerned about this because their deed restrictions prohibit trash cans from sitting on the street for any length of time.

The city says it has no plans to restrict trash cans sitting on the street. So the city is saying it is not concerned with blight in the city or concerned about residents who are upset that neighborhoods have been turned into trash dumps.

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

Shiraz — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 23:28:42 GMT

The 96-gallon containers are adequate for families that have 3 or more people, and have large houses. For those residents that have small houses and are only 1 OR 2 persons in the family, the 96-gallon containers are too large not only for the amount of waste produced, but also bulky and very difficult to store because of the reduced space in their houses.

The smaller containers available, (30-gallon containers for trash and 18-gallon containers for recycling) are not big enough for families with 1 OR 2 persons.

THIS IS ANOTHER POOR "DECISION" MADE BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL. INSTEAD OF DESIGNING A SYSTEM THAT SOLVES THE PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY NEIGHBORING TOWNS WITH THIS TYPE OF RECYLING, THEY HAVE CHOSEN TO COPY A DEFICIENT SYSTEM THAT DISCRIMINATES AGAINST A LARGE PORTION OF THE RESIDENTS. POOR GOVERNMENT THAT WE SHOULD CHANGE ASAP.

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

Shiraz — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 23:13:34 GMT

The 96-gallon containers are adequate for families that have 3 or more people, and have large houses. For those residents that have small houses and are only 1 or 2 persons in the family, the 96-gallon containers are too large not only for the amount of waste produced, but also bulky and very difficult to store because of the reduced space in their houses.

The smaller containers available, (30-gallon containers for trash and 18-gallon containers for recycling) are not big enough for families with 1 or 2 persons.

THE SAME AS WITH OTHER "DECISIONS" MADE BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THIS IS A POOR AND DEFICIENT RECYCLE SYSTEM, AS IT DOES

NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE NEEDS OF ALL THE R.ROCK RESIDENTS

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

Will Hampton — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:31:48 GMT

@NOGirl You can dispose of CFLs at the City's Recycle Center, 310 Deepwood Drive. They are accepted daily.

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

NOGirl — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 22:17:53 GMT

How are Compact Fluorescent Light bulbs to be disposed of?

Light bulbs cannot be recycled per the recycling instructions, but since the CFL bulbs contain mercury, I would imagine they shouldn’t be put in the garbage either as land fills would be contaminated. I had heard that the mercury could be extracted and reused, but don’t know if this is the case. In the not too distant future we will be inundated with these as people change from incandescent bulbs to compact fluorescent bulbs. How are we to dispose of these?

re: An update on Google fiber

SheilaS — Sat, 01 Jan 2011 20:48:35 GMT

Thanks for the update, Brooks! I was sorta wondering....:)

re: City Council approves changes to garbage/recycling service, effective January 2011

Brooks Bennett — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 15:54:39 GMT

@gprrtx I brought up your concern with Ralph Rocco at Round Rock Refuse and he said a reasonable amount of moisture getting in the cart is okay and will not effect their ability to recycle the material.