Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
17 Shared Waste Service PDF 46 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
The
Single Shared Waste Service (SSWS) between Cambridge City Council and South
Cambridgeshire DC (SCDC) was designed to facilitate financial savings, greater
innovation, increased recycling performance and lower landfill. The report outlined
performance and policy measures that would be taken in the current year to
contribute to delivering on those objectives.
A
further report would be brought for Members’ decision in January 2017 relating
to the commissioning of a harmonised vehicle fleet operating for both councils.
Decision of Executive Councillor for Environment and
Waste
i.
Approved
aggregation of recycling and waste performance with South Cambridgeshire DC for
official reporting to the Government’s national Waste Data Flow system.
ii.
Authorised
improvements in the Council’s policies to make recycling even easier for
residents, and discourage landfill waste, as follows: -
A. Permit residents to put out reasonable amounts of recyclates for collection next to the recycling bin if it
is already full, and put in place arrangements and communicate with residents
to allow implementation from 3 October 2016.
B. Explore opportunities within existing budgets to
assist residents in reducing landfill waste, and increasing recycling,
particularly packaging, food/organics, textiles and real Christmas trees.
C. Households of at least six people, or at least two
children of nappy age, may qualify on application (and subject to ongoing
qualification) for an additional residual waste bin of 140 litre capacity with
a red lid. Existing 240 litre additional residual waste bins with red lids will
be surveyed to establish continuing qualification and, if approved, be replaced
with 140 litre bins in due course.
D. Remove
administration charges for additional residual waste bins on the basis that
only households that qualify may receive an additional bin (at no charge).
E. Remove
the charges to residents for the replacement of damaged residual waste bins
(black bins) thus ensuring there are no charges for damaged bins for recycling,
green waste or residual services.
F.
Remove the need for residents to secure
Police Incident Numbers (PINs) in relation to stolen bins, and remove the
charges to residents for stolen residual waste bins (black bins).
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Head of Waste Resources which was presented by the Interim
Strategic Director.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Suggested that merging the performance figures for
recycling could mask poor performance of some areas.
ii.
Welcomed the direction of travel but expressed
concerns that detailed city data would be missing.
iii.
Suggested that targeted approaches to recycling
needed detailed data to produce results.
iv.
Expressed concerns about side waste in narrow city
streets.
v.
Suggested that there was not enough information on
how the side waste collection service worked in South Cambs.
vi.
Suggested that residents would need to be educated regarding
the correct use of the side waste service.
vii.
Requested into detailed data collection rates so
that the service could be data driven. The Interim Strategic Director
undertook to look into this outside the meeting.
The Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste stated the following
in response to Members’ questions:
i.
The phase of route optimisation would produce
savings.
ii.
Suggested that other
factors impacted on differences in recycling rates between Cambridge and South
Cambs residents. For example: South Cambs gardens were likely to be bigger
resulting in higher rates of green waste. However, in environmental terms it
was better if green waste was composed by householders themselves.
Councillor Bick suggested that additional
wording be added to recommendation 2.2 A. regarding reviewing the side waste
arrangements in a year’s time.
The Executive Councillor stated that an additional
recommendation was not advisable at this stage as this was a cross authority
decision. Additional recommendations would cause delays. He further suggested
that this could be delivered without it being part of the recommendations.
However, he suggested that a two year timeframe would be more appropriate.
The Committee resolved by 4 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendation.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive
Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.