Previous reference: Minute 11 (2015/16)

The report of the Strategic Director, Regeneration, (Document “J”) provides a description of the current management of waste and presents an update on the work programmes established in 2016 and those planned for 2017/2018 to improve the management of waste to more sustainable levels in line with the Municipal Waste Minimisation and Management Strategy 2015 (MWMMS).

Members are requested to consider the information presented in Document “J” and request a further progress report in 12 months time.

(Richard Longcake – 01274 432855)

The report of the Strategic Director, Environment and Sport, (Document “J”) provided a description of the current management of waste and presented an update on the work programmes established in 2016 and those planned for 2017/2018 to improve the management of waste to more sustainable levels in line with the Municipal Waste Minimisation and Management Strategy 2015 (MWMMS).

A detailed presentation on the waste service operations undertaken was provided and included an update on kerbside residual waste collections; kerbside recycling collections; the recent introduction of recycling collection nodes in the city centre for residents living in multi occupancy accommodation and statistics for the total tonnes of Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW) and Household Waste (HW). 

It was clarified that LACW, formerly known as Municipal Waste, was the total amount of waste that the service managed and HW only included waste and recycling collected from households at the kerbside, waste and recycling delivered by residents to Household Waste Recycling Centres, recyclables delivered to Bring Sites and street litter collected from around the district.

It was noted that during discussions about the trial of alternate weekly collection of residual waste it had been reported that residents could fully co-mingle their dry recyclable waste.  Members queried the changes which had occurred to allow that to happen and it was explained that there had been advances in separation technology and there now was an available market for plastic other than just bottles.

It was questioned if items previously composted were now utilised for energy recovery and Members were advised that organic fractions, essentially food waste contained in residual waste, were extracted and sent to anaerobic digestion.

Cost comparisons between the recently introduced recycling collection nodes and Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRCs) and ‘Bring Sites’ were discussed.  It was clarified that the nodes located in the city centre were refurbished and had been purchased at a reduced cost.  There were a limited number of nodes available and due to their locations they needed to be smaller and more aesthetically pleasing than the large receptacles located elsewhere. 

Members questioned if reductions in waste, depicted in Performance Indicators for HW , resulted in increases in waste elsewhere.  It was explained that investigations had been made and no subsequent increases in fly tipping had occurred. 

The aims of the Municipal Waste Minimisation and Management Strategy (MWMMS) were to get people to think about the waste generated and it was hoped that those reductions were as a result of that policy.

The presentation continued with an update on the work programmes established in 2015 and those planned for 2017/18 to manage waste to more sustainable levels, e.g. minimise residual waste and increase recycling, in line with the MWMMS. 

It was explained that a key element of the MWMMS was the introduction of the Domestic Waste and Recycling Policy (aka the Bin Policy).  The policy had now been successfully implemented across the whole district

Its aim was to divert a greater percentage of recyclable waste from the residual green waste bin to the grey recyclable waste bin at the kerbside. The policy only allowed the emptying of one 240L residual (green) bin per household, or one 360L (for a household with 7 or more residents) and no side waste or overfilled bins presented at the kerbside per week.

In the five months to August 2016 compared against the same period for 2015 the total kerbside residual waste collected had reduced by 1,887 tonnes, and for the same period the total of kerbside recycling had increased by 992 tonnes.

It was reported that compliance with the policy was monitored and the service engaged with residents and the Council’s own staff to ensure the policy was understood and complied with.  Enforcement action taken was reported and Members were assured that generally compliance had been very positive with significant reductions in residual waste.

A Member questioned if a request made at a previous meeting that communications to residents be made available to residents who had English as a second language.  In response it was explained that no specific literature had been developed, however, a video to school children demonstrated pictorially how waste could be separated.  Wardens also spoke to residents plainly and pictorially and the issue had been discussed at Neighbourhood Forums.

Document “J” also revealed that the service was undertaking a project in conjunction with the University of Bradford and a Leeds based company Hebeworks. The Binnovation project was looking at introducing smarter ways of bin collection in households utilising sensory detectors in trial bins. It was revealed that an opt in trial would be undertaken of 60 households in the Shipley area and in response to questions it was explained that any Members wishing to take part in that trial should contact the service via email. The rollout to households was expected to commence in October/November.  Members queried if the technology could trace the owner of a bin should that be stolen and it was explained that the location not the owner could be traced.

The chargeable Garden Waste Service, introduced on 1st June 2016, was discussed.  The cost implications of residents not involved in that scheme who deposited garden waste in residual bins were questioned.   In response it was explained that the ‘bin policy’ stated that garden waste must not be placed in the residual bin.  The potential for garden waste to be hidden in those bins had been considered but it was believed that limited capacity in the bins and fortnightly collections would address that issue.  The amount of residual waste tonnes had reduced so it was not felt that the practice was occurring.

The potential to reuse the unwanted garden bins was raised and Members were advised that options were being considered.  Arrangements for composting were discussed and it was explained that details were available on the Council’s website. 

The rationale for not allowing all residents to fully co-mingle their dry recyclable waste following the advances in separation technology and the available market for plastic other than just bottles was questioned.  In response Members were advised that the service would like to extend the trial being undertaken in the Wyke Ward.  The trial was, however, in its early stages and was required to assess the scheme’s effectiveness. The trial would conclude in six months time, however, it was felt that more information would be available prior to Christmas.

The Cashless Systems and Charging Policy, introduced for discretionary services within the Waste Service were questioned and the ability for residents to pay for bulky waste collections in cash was raised.  In response it was explained that pay point facilities were still available which residents could request by telephone. 

Resolved –

(1)  That the contents of Document “J” be noted.

(2)  That the Strategic Director, Environment and Sport, be requested to provide a progress report in 12 months time.

(3)  That, when the information becomes available, the Strategic Director, Environment and Sport, be requested to circulate to all Members of the Committee the results of the trial of the alternate weekly bin collections in the Wyke Ward.

ACTION: Strategic Director, Environment and Sport