The Committee will receive an update presentation on the redesign of the Waste Collection Service.

The Committee received a PowerPoint presentation update on the redesign of the Waste Collection Service from the Waste Contracts Manager.  A copy of the presentation slides is included as part of the formal record of the meeting.

The Committee noted particularly the two prototype services being trialled in the Bayston Hill/Meole Brace area and the Hanwood area, as follows:

·        Option 1 - Bayston Hill/ Meole Brace – 102 properties – Week 1 mixed        containers, paper/cardboard, garden waste, food waste; Week 2    residual waste and food waste. 

·         Option 2 - Hanwood – 102 properties – Week 1 card/paper, mixed containers and garden/food waste mixed; Week 2 residual waste.

The Waste Contracts Manager explained that broad estimates of the savings expected from each prototype amounted to approximately £250k for Option 1 and £1m for Option 2, but these figures may be subject to significant change following further information from the prototypes themselves and negotiations with Veolia.

The Committee Chairman added that Option 1 delivered potential for income generation and partnership working.  The Waste Contracts Manager confirmed this and stated that there were other potential benefits to option 1 that had not yet been included in the savings estimate. The Area Commissioner North explained that an application for the development of an anaerobic digester in the Whitchurch area could potentially see energy savings for that area but it was too early to provide a clear estimate. The Committee noted that no decision had as yet been made regarding the re-instatement of the Ludlow facility.

Referring to Option 2, the Waste Contracts Manager explained that there were potentially more savings from this option.  The Area Commissioner North assured the Committee that the benefits of ‘doing things differently’ were being closely scrutinised and costs across the whole scheme were being analysed.

In response to a Member’s query on the impact of the closure of the recycling centre at Coder Road, Ludlow, the Waste Contracts Manager stated that any impact on the Council’s recycling rates were being closely monitored and would be taken into consideration as part of the county-wide picture.  He added that contract savings would be made by waste collection vehicles being more adaptable with more compaction and therefore the need to use fewer vehicles.  He added that the aim was to dispose of less, recycle more and promote income generation by selling capacity to other organisations at the incinerator.

Members voiced some concern regarding food waste; its smell and the frequency of collection.  The Area Commissioner North explained that the two trials were very specific regarding the food waste collection and added that currently food waste constituted 36% of the waste in household bins.  The Waste Contracts Manager explained that food waste related to any food and the waste could be collected in caddies that could be lined with caddy liners or newspaper.

Referring to co-mingling of waste [glass, cans and plastic], the Waste Contracts Manager acknowledged that residents had been used to sorting out their recycling but the anticipated increase in tonnage from co-mingling would offer increased diversion of waste from disposal.  In answer to a Member’s concern about cardboard recycling, he confirmed that cardboard folded and placed next to residents’ collection materials would be taken away by operatives.

The Chairman suggested that members of the Committee may benefit from accompanying a waste collection to witness the service in action in order to inform future scrutiny of this subject.  It was agreed that those interested make contact with the Chairman and the appropriate arrangements would be made. 

A Member requested feedback from the Portfolio Holder on the Council’s progress in meeting the 11 recommendations from DEFRA following its contract management review report on the Waste Infrastructure Delivery Programme [considered at the meeting of the former Protecting and Enhancing our Environment Scrutiny Committee 9 July 2012].  The Area Commissioner North assured that Committee that the Council had to comply with the requirements of DEFRA and the Treasury but an update could be provided to a future meeting.

RESOLVED:

i)      That the update information provided on the Council’s Waste Collection Service redesign, be noted;

ii)    That members of the Committee interested in witnessing the waste collection service in action inform the Chairman so that appropriate arrangements can be made.