Agenda item

Car parking strategy

Early work had been undertaken by the car parking strategy working group to agree the scope of its work. Some concern was raised about the number of attendees at meetings. Further meetings of the working group would be held between January and March 2016, which members were encouraged to attend.

Local Authority Controlled Company (LACC)

A copy of the recommendations made by the LACC working group that had looked at the creation of a local authority controlled company was circulated to members. Brief explanation was given as to the background behind the working group: to find ways of generating income to offset the loss of Revenue Support Grant. Members were reassured that under a company limited by shares, the Council would be the shareholder. Operating as a controlled company would provide the opportunity for the Council to be active in areas of commercial trade where it could not otherwise have operated, for example, private sector housing.

Members of the PDG supported the recommendations of the working group.

Waste

Detailed discussion ensued on the recommendations made by the waste working group:

Issue:                             Different sizes of bin

Comments:                  Providing smaller bins could support residents currently reliant on the assisted collection scheme.

Recommendation:     To provide smaller bins free of charge on request

Issue:                             Clarification regarding bags

Comments:                  To introduce a maximum of 4-bags per collection; capacity would then match available capacity within a wheeled bin.

Recommendation:     Capacity of bags should match capacity of a wheeled bin

Issue:                             Collection points

Comments:                  Pictorial guides should show the point at which waste would be collected, providing a simple visual representation of the policy currently in place

Recommendation:     To provide pictorial information regarding collection points for the avoidance of doubt

Issue:                             Missed bins

Comments:                  That the three strikes policy, where a crew would return to empty a missed bin would be removed; returning to empty missed bins was resource-intensive. Instead any missed bin would only be emptied as part of the next collection for that type of bin. If there was another reason why a bin has not been emptied, the crew would tag the bin to explain why. Some concerns were expressed about the impact on neighbouring properties if crews did not return for missed bins. Officers explained that where this was a problem an intensive education campaign would be run in the area. Members were given assurance that, if necessary, action could be taken on a case-by-case basis however the focus of the policy was setting the framework and tone. Where bin collection was affected by highways disruptions (e.g. utilities works), there would be a cut-off point at which crews would not attempt to go back and collect bins.

Recommendation:     To remove the three strikes policy and for crews to tag bins when they were not emptied for a specific reason

Issue:                             Payments for replacement bins

Comments:                  Provision for making payments for replacement bins was already within the Waste Policy. The working group recommended that a clear framework for charging arrangements should be set out within the policy.

Recommendation:     To charge for replacement bins if they fall into certain categories

Issue:                             Wheeled bins on new developments

Comments:                  The proposed charge would apply to developments of all sizes and would sit separately from Section 106 Agreements.

Recommendation:     Developers should be asked to pay a £50 charge for two bins plus delivery per new build property. If the developer fails to pay, the cost would be passed on to the householder

Issue:                             Liquid waste in medical bins

Comments:                  While legislation permitted charging for the collection of medical waste members did not support the principle. A second wheeled bin could be provided for those residents who have ongoing medical problems. If a charge was introduced, people might find other ways to dispose of medical waste.

Recommendation:     Liquid waste should not be disposed of using wheeled bins and that there should be no additional charge for medical waste bins or sharps collections

Issue:                             Multiple occupancy

Comments:                  For properties with multiple occupancy, consideration would be given to providing 1100 litre bins, the charge for which would fall to the landlord or the management company

Recommendation:     To make large capacity bins available following payment to cover the cost of the bin and delivery by the landlord or management company

Issue:                             Bulky items outside the scope of individually priced items

Comments:                  Householders could request an appointment for a supervisor’s visit regarding the collection of garden-related materials to assess whether they would be collectable and the cost of collection as appropriate. The proposal would formalise that procedure.

Recommendation:     To formalise arrangements for making appointments regarding bulky waste collections that sit outside the budget book

Issue:                             Provision of additional bins

Comments:                  This would allow for the provision of additional bins for households with 5 or more people. Additional bins would only be agreed following completion of a waste audit to ensure that maximum recycling was taking place. Recipients would be required to pay or contribute to the cost of the additional bin.

Recommendation:     Following completion of a waste audit, additional bins to be issued to households with 5 or more people, with the cost being borne by the household.

Issue:                             Charging non-domestic establishments

Comments:                  There were a number of halls within the district which were provided with a free service. The working group recommended introducing a charge for such venues. Members noted churches would be exempt however there was no exemption for buildings such as scout huts. Opinion was split on whether charges should be introduced as the community benefit provided by such buildings was considered of greater benefit than the impact that charging them might create. Specific reference was also made to parishes where contributions could be made to facilities through the local precept and how this subsidy would not be available in Grantham as there was no town/parish council. Adversely, other members felt that community halls were operating commercially and that they should operate within the same conditions as other commercial enterprises (including charity shops). Incidents were also cited of community halls that required hirers to take any rubbish home with them; hiring halls on this basis would remove the need for them to make collection arrangements.

Recommendation:     To introduce charges for non-domestic establishments (opinion was split and the recommendation was decided by Chairman’s casting vote)

Issue:                             Consider relaxation of contamination policy

Comments:                  Following changes to recycling provision on a countywide basis, it was suggested that the contamination policy could be relaxed. Members did not agree with relaxing the policy because of the message it communicated about the value and importance of recycling however they did note that there was management discretion in place for use where appropriate.

Recommendation:     The contamination policy should not be relaxed

Issue:                             Introduce charges for school recycling

Comments:                  A free recycling service was provided to approximately half of the schools within the district. Since that service was introduced, a number of those schools had become academies and independent of the local education authority. Opinion on the introduction of these charges was mixed. Some members felt that the free service to encourage and promote recycling with children was of greater social and community benefit than introducing a charged service, which might deter schools from recycling. Members in support of the proposal noted that approximately half the schools in the district had made their own waste collection arrangements and that it was not fair to provide a free service for some and not all. Those members who did not support the proposal did not think it was fair to treat all of the different types of schools in the same way.

Recommendation:     To introduce charges for school recycling (opinion was split and the recommendation was decided by Chairman’s casting vote)