|
|
Line 34: |
Line 34: |
| *[[TSS credits for street sweeping]] | | *[[TSS credits for street sweeping]] |
| *[[Guidance for incorporating street sweeping into the Minimal Impact Design Standards Calculator and MPCA’s Simple Estimator]] | | *[[Guidance for incorporating street sweeping into the Minimal Impact Design Standards Calculator and MPCA’s Simple Estimator]] |
| + | |
| + | ==Fact sheets, quick guides== |
| + | *[[Benefits of street sweeping]] |
| + | *[[Recommended street sweeping practices]] |
| + | *[[Street Sweeping Phosphorus Credit Calculator How-to-Guide]] |
| | | |
| ==University of Minnesota research on street sweeping== | | ==University of Minnesota research on street sweeping== |
Revision as of 18:51, 1 November 2022
Image courtesy Sarah Hobbie, University of Minnesota
There are multiple reasons for sweeping streets. However, for water quality purposes, sweeping is best done in spring following fruit drop and autumn following leaf drop. In this image, the street was to be swept the day after the image was taken. Very little water quality benefit will be gained from sweeping this street.
Information: The MPCA hosted a webinar on street sweeping, Thursday May 13, 9:30-11:00 AM.
Information from the webinar is posted and includes a recording of the webinar, the chat file including answers to questions, and speaker presentations.
Acknowledgements
Street sweeping webinar
NOTE:Hover over bolded text to see the contents for a page
Information on street sweeping
Street sweeping crediting and Phosphorus Calculator
Fact sheets, quick guides
University of Minnesota research on street sweeping
Links
Survey of street sweeping practices
The MPCA conducted a survey of cities to determine their street sweeping practices, their interest in a street sweeping credit, and their ability to implement different methods for crediting sweeping. We have not yet fully analyzed the data, but some general conclusions include the following.
- 75 cities responded to the survey and indicated they operate a sweeping program. This was a response rate of close to 50 percent. The responses were distributed geographically across the state and covered a wide range of city sizes (large to small).
- About 78 percent indicated they would be likely to participate in a crediting program
- All but 7 cities can track sweeping information, but 66 percent said they cannot relate material collected to a specific geographic area. This is a question we likely will follow-up with, since being able to relate material to a geographic location is potentially a way of targeting sweeping efforts.
- Most cities estimate volume or mass of material collected, but few measure volume or mass or have the ability to measure dry weight of material collected
- Most cities sweep quarterly or less and most do not specifically sweep in response to fall leave drop
The summary information can be found here.
Related pages