Contact your Parish Council
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
CABINET MEMBER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
REPORT OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND REGULATORY SERVICES
Report prepared by Jennifer Gosling
Date Issued: 19 July 2012
1. Review of Waste and Recycling Services – Policy Changes
1.1 Key Issue for Decision
To consider a range of issues regarding the Council’s waste and recycling services
1.2 Recommendation of the Assistant Director for the Environment and Regulatory Services
It is recommended that:
1.2.1 the sale of compostable sacks is limited to households who are unable to accommodate a garden bin from September 2013;
1.2.2 households who remain on a garden sack collection are required to register for an annual subscription;
1.2.3 smaller garden bins are offered at a reduced rate identified in the report;
1.2.4 a marketing plan is agreed to promote and facilitate the transition from compostable bags to garden bins by July 2013;
1.2.5 an introductory offer of “the first 2 months free” is available for new subscribers to the wheeled bin service;
1.2.6 brown wheeled bins are provided for all replacement or new garden bins from the start of the new contract;
1.2.7 the costs of providing all wheeled bins for new developments are recovered from the developer;
1.2.8 the current Saturday freighter schedule is maintained;
1.2.9 the strategy for rationalising the provision of bring sites within the borough following enhancement of the kerbside services is agreed;
1.2.10 the land owners of the current recycling sites are contacted prior to the withdrawal of any banks to encourage them to work with the existing charity providers to maintain textile recycling banks.
1.2.11 households receiving a black sack collection for refuse and who can accommodate the food waste collection, should be provided with a fortnightly refuse collection in line with the rest of the borough.
Appendix A outlines the recommendations from this report, the objective and the potential impact on residents.
1.3 Reasons for Recommendation
1.4 The Best Value Review of the Waste and Recycling Services in 2009 highlighted a wide range of recommendations to improve the services offered to local residents. All of these recommendations, where viable have been implemented including introducing food waste collections, simplifying the bulky collection service and exploring opportunities for commercial waste collections. These actions have now increased the council’s recycling rate to 45% and overall waste arisings have decreased by 8% since the introduction of food waste collections.
1.5 Following on from the Best Value Review, the council has had a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspection which although largely positive highlighted some recommendations. The most significant was a recommendation for a policy review of the garden waste service, which is covered below.
1.6 In addition to this inspection, all waste and recycling services have been reviewed in preparation of the Mid Kent Joint Waste Collection Contract. Some further recommendations to improve the efficiency of the service and to ensure the service continues to support the objectives set out in the council’s five year waste strategy have also been identified through this process. These recommendations are laid out below.
1.7 The Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee has also carried out a “Making Waste Work for Maidstone” Review which has presented further recommendations for continuous improvement. A Scrutiny Committee Recommendation Action and Implementation Plan (SCRAIP) has been submitted in response to this review which is presented in Appendix B.
1.7.1 Garden Waste Collection Service
1.7.2 In September 2011, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) carried out an inspection of Maidstone Borough Council’s waste collection service. This was part of a Kent wide project of the HSE to provide feedback to councils about their health and safety responsibilities, especially with regard to the procurement of private contractors.
1.7.3 Following this inspection, the HSE provided written feedback to the council regarding suggested areas of improvement and potential areas of concern. One of the primary concerns was with the garden waste service which uses both wheeled bins and compostable sacks. The HSE recognises the health and safety impact of collecting sacks, particularly in regard to the risk of injury associated with manual handling and therefore recommends the provision of wheeled bins wherever possible.
1.7.4 The HSE commended Maidstone Borough Council on its wheeled bin policy for refuse and recycling collection. This policy states that households which have been assessed as being suitable to accommodate a wheeled bin will be provided with one and only those not suitable will have a black sack and recycling box collection. However the HSE noted that the council’s policy for the provision of garden bins did not support the same ethos.
1.7.5 Maidstone’s current garden waste service allows residents to choose whether to hire a garden bin or purchase garden waste sacks from local retailers. A large proportion of residents in the borough purchase compostable sacks and therefore the service requires a garden waste vehicle to visit every property on a fortnightly basis.
1.7.6 The HSE have stated that the co-collection of sacks and bins with the current arrangements poses a significant risk to the operatives and therefore should be reviewed at the earliest opportunity.
1.7.7 The current service also enables significant opportunities for misuse, with a monitoring exercise showing up to 10% of households with garden bins were not paying for them. When a garden bin is hired an account is created and annual invoices are sent out. Unfortunately not all of these are paid and result in attempts to reclaim the bin. The majority of unpaid bins result from residents moving property and not informing the council of their new address for billing purposes. This problem could be prevented by operating a collection based solely on subscriptions.
1.7.8 This summer there have been increased levels of complaints concerning the quality of the compostable bags. These bags meet the required specification of the composting facilities at Blaise Farm and unfortunately can not be any thicker as they would not degrade in the time to comply with the requirements of the composting process. The current problem with the bags is that they only have a 6-12 month shelf-life and the council is unable to regulate the length of time the retailers store the bags before sale to residents. In addition, the decomposition of the bags is accelerated during periods of very wet weather which accounts for some of the problems experienced this summer compared with summer 2011.
1.7.9 Maidstone Borough Council is currently procuring the Mid Kent Joint Waste Contract (MKJWC) in partnership with Ashford and Swale Borough Councils. Both Ashford and Swale council’s intend to provide wheeled bins for the collection of garden waste, which will enable the contractor to only visit properties hiring a bin. Therefore Maidstone is likely to face a costly premium if the contractor is required to visit all households within the borough regardless of whether they present garden waste for collection. The current system means that it is not possible to know which properties are going to put garden sacks out for collection.
1.7.10 The current cost of the garden waste collection service is detailed in the table below:
|
Service Costs 2011/12 |
£ |
|
Purchase of sacks |
69,260 |
|
Contract costs |
478,631 |
|
Garden bin purchase – new customers |
47,838 |
|
Sub total |
595,729 |
|
Income 2011/12 |
£ |
|
MBC direct garden sack sales |
22,427 |
|
Retailers sales |
156,800 |
|
Garden bin hire |
341,610 |
|
Sub total |
520,837 |
|
TOTAL |
74,892 |
This does not include the delivery cost for the garden bins which would be a portion of the contract cost of £58,721 per annum. This equates to approximately £8,300 for the delivery / removal of garden bins only.
1.7.11 The proposed changes to the service are not projected to have a significant impact on the overall cost of the service. Although income will be reduced due to withdrawal of sack sales, the level of bin subscriptions is projected to increase, capital costs for bags will be minimal and there will be an opportunity to reduce the contract costs through a reduction in fleet.
1.7.12 Making these changes now will also significantly reduce the risk of increased contract costs in the future, as the costs for operating this service are expected to increase significantly for the new contract.
1.7.13 Visiting every property on a fortnightly basis regardless of whether they present waste for collection, is not a sustainable service and has serious implications on air quality, CO2 emissions and cost. Especially in rural and high density housing areas, vehicles can travel substantial distances without collecting any waste. This service therefore does not support the council’s objectives to reduce carbon and provide sustainable services for the future.
1.7.14 It is recommended that the council restricts the use of compostable bags to households which cannot accommodate a garden bin. This will significantly reduce the health and safety risk posed from these collections as well as allowing the service to be provided specifically for those who use it.
1.7.15 It is unlikely that all households who are eligible for garden sacks will produce garden waste and therefore use the service. Therefore it is recommended that households who require a garden sack collection register with the council and are required to purchase an annual subscription. This annual subscription would be a set price regardless of whether the householder was eligible for a garden bin or compostable sacks. This will enable the new contractor to plan the collection route more efficiently and reduce the cost of this service in line with the other partnering authorities.
1.7.16 It is recognised that some households do not have the space or need for the 240 litre garden bin currently used for this service and therefore it is also recommended that a smaller 140 litre bin is offered with a 20% reduction from the price of the 240 litre wheeled bin.
1.7.17 It is recommended to allow 12 months to withdraw the bags from operation prior to the start of the new contract. This is the same level of time taken to change from the old plastic green sacks to the new compostable ones. This would allow residents sufficient time to use any existing stock.
1.7.18 Therefore it is proposed that from 1st September 2012 the council ceases sales of compostable sacks to local retailers. It would then be expected that the retailers would sell their remaining stock and residents could continue using any bags they have until 31st July 2013.
1.7.19 From September 2012, residents who are not able to accommodate a 240 litre garden waste bin but would like to take part in the service would have the following options:
(i) Share a bin with a neighbour
(ii) Hire a 140 litre garden waste bin
(iii) Compost their waste at home
(iv) Subscribe to the annual garden waste service and present their waste in compostable garden waste sacks
Appendix C outlines the options and Appendix D shows the proposed pricing structure for the garden waste collection service.
1.7.20 Residents currently on sack collections for refuse who wish to subscribe to the garden waste service will be provided with 26 compostable sacks and a coupon to claim an addition 26 from the Gateway should they be required.
1.7.21 It is not recommended that a larger supply of bags is provided at the start of the year as there is a risk of them degrading before use. There is also a concern that many would be wasted as exempt properties are, in general terms, more likely to produce lower levels of garden waste.
1.7.22 For the past couple of years the council has encouraged residents to hire bins rather than purchase sacks through incentivised prices and through publicising the benefit of the bins. In order to facilitate the transition for bags to bins, it is proposed that the council undertakes a comprehensive communication and marketing plan to explain the reasons behind the changes and outline the options residents have to deal with their garden waste.
1.7.23 The proposed communications and marketing plan is detailed in Appendix E.
1.7.24 To encourage residents to hire garden bins, it is also proposed to offer an introductory offer of “the first 2 months free” for new subscribers to the service. This offer would not be available to those already subscribing to the wheeled bin service. This would be a reduction of £5 for 240 litre garden bins and £4.50 for 140 litre garden bins.
1.7.25 An amnesty period for residents with bins without accounts will be publicised. After this period, enforcement action will be taken against illegitimate bins which are not paid for.
1.7.26 It is also recommended that brown wheeled bins are provided for all replacement or new garden bins from the start of the new contract.
1.7.27 In order for the successful bidder to effectively manage the partners’ assets it is important for the majority of these assets to be uniform across the three areas. It is therefore recommended that to improve the look of the existing bins and to match those currently used in Swale, brown wheeled bins are used for any future replacements.
1.7.28 Other minor policy changes
1.7.29 Wheeled bin provision - Whilst the proposed changes to the garden waste service are likely to have the biggest impact, other minor changes to council policies have been identified which would enable to the service to evolve, improving efficiency and tailoring services to meet customers’ needs.
1.7.30 In 2011/12, Maidstone Borough Council spent approximately £133,000 on the replacement and provision of wheeled bins and other containers. In addition to this a further £60,000 was spend on the provision of staff and vehicles to deliver these containers.
1.7.31 The table below shows the breakdown of these costs into the various bin types:
|
Bin type |
Quantity* |
Indicative Unit cost** |
Total cost |
|
240 litre recycling bin |
1573 |
£17.85 |
£28,078 |
|
240 litre garden bin |
2680 |
£17.85 |
£47,838 |
|
180 litre refuse bin |
2708 |
£17.70 |
£47,932 |
|
240 litre refuse bin |
648 |
£17.85 |
£11,567 |
|
5 litre kitchen caddy |
1103 |
£0.80 |
£882 |
|
23 litre food bin |
2299 |
£2.50 |
£5,748 |
*quantity requested – please note the total cost takes into account any bins which are returned in a reusable condition and are therefore returned to stock
**these are indicative figures only, actual prices will vary with different orders. This accounts for the difference in the sum of the costs in the table and the £133,000 reported in 1.7.27 which is based on actual spend 2011/12.
1.7.32 Garden bins for new subscribers are the highest proportion of bin requests, with the level increasing from approximately 4,000 in 2004/05 to over 11,000 in 2011/12.
1.7.33 However a significant number of additional recycling bins, replacement recycling bin and replacement refuse bins are being requested, substantially increasing the cost to the council.
1.7.34 The council currently charges developers for the provision of 1100 litre metal bins for communal collections in new developments, however still provides individual wheeled bins for new houses. It is proposed to extend the current arrangements to cover all wheeled bins provided for new developments.
1.7.35 Currently developers are able to source their own bins however they must be compliant with the council’s specification. It is proposed that this specification is extended to include the following:
(i) Grey 240 / 180 litre refuse bins (2 wheeled / plastic)
(ii) Green 240 litre recycling bins (2 wheeled / plastic)
(iii) 240 litre communal bin with appropriate aperture for food waste (2 wheeled / plastic) – from start of new contract 2013/14
1.7.36 The table above in 1.3.20 shows that replacement refuse bins remain the highest cost to the council at nearly £43,000 in 2011/12. However as a proportion of the number of bins within the borough, this is less than 5%.
|
|
Damaged |
Missing |
Total |
|
|
Refuse / recycling |
1682 |
1623 |
3305 |
£58,498.50 |
|
Garden |
90 |
79 |
169 |
£3,016.65 |
|
On-line requests |
264 |
417 |
681 |
£12,053.70 |
|
TOTAL |
2036 |
2119 |
4155 |
£73,568.50 |
1.7.37 The table above shows that 58% of the council’s expenditure on wheeled bins is for the replacement of damaged and missing bins. Also highlighted in this table is that the level of replacement garden bins is very low suggesting that as residents pay to hire these they are looked after more carefully and therefore are less liable to be stolen or damaged.
1.7.38 Whilst it is not in the interest of the council to restrict the availability of recycling and garden waste bins which promote recycling, there is a need to address the issue of the number of replacement grey wheeled bins being requested.
1.7.39 Three options to reduce the cost of replacement containers have been explored and are detailed in Appendix F.
1.7.40 All three of these options aim to reduce the cost to the council of providing bins, however require varying levels of administration.
1.7.41 It is recommended that Option 3 is implemented at this stage which would pass on the costs of providing new containers to developers.
1.7.42 It is also proposed that in order to reduce delivery costs that replacement kitchen caddies are provided via the council’s Gateway only for a charge of £1.00. Alternatively residents can purchase their own from garden centres, supermarkets or other stockists.
1.7.43 Saturday Freighter - The Saturday freighter service was reviewed in 2010 and the schedule amended to reflect the communities’ needs.
1.7.44 The service has never been intended to offer a personal service but to provide a more localised waste disposal point for those who do not live close to the Tovil Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC).
1.7.45 Over the past few months and following the Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s “Making Waste Work for Maidstone” Review, the Saturday freighter service has once again been reviewed.
1.7.46 Whilst the service undoubtedly helps some members of the local community to dispose of their waste, it directly conflicts with the principles of Maidstone’s Waste Strategy. Unfortunately all waste collected through the Saturday freighter is sent to landfill, including many recyclable items which if taken to the Household Waste Recycling Centre in Tovil would be separated and recycled. This is not consistent with the Council’s objective to follow the principles of the Waste Hierarchy to prevent, reuse and recycle waste wherever possible.
1.7.47 The Saturday freighter has not been included in the new Mid Kent Joint Waste Contract in order to retain the flexibility of the service and to allow it to be developed in the future to meet the changing needs of local residents.
1.7.48 It is proposed to maintain the current schedule, however to continue to monitor the usage of the service and identify options to increase the diversion of recyclable and reusable waste.
1.7.49 Recycling Sites - There are currently 29 recycling sites within the borough collecting a range of materials including glass, paper, textiles, beverage cartons, shoes and music.
1.7.50 Currently just over 2,000 tonnes of recycling are collected through the recycling sites, which equates to 4% of the total waste thrown away.
1.7.51 Whilst the textile and shoe banks are operated by charities and the income generated from the material funds the collection, the glass banks currently cost the council £16.50 per tonne to empty. In 2011/12, this cost Maidstone Borough Council over £35,000.
1.7.52 The cost of the glass banks is currently offset by the recycling credits provided by Kent County Council. However through the new Inter Authority Agreement, agreed as part of the new joint waste contract arrangements, the recycling credit scheme will be replaced and will now offset the kerbside collection costs to provide the council with savings.
1.7.53 With the kerbside collections being expanded to include glass, it is recommended that the recycling sites are scaled back, leaving only the main supermarket sites which have the greatest usage.
1.7.54 It is proposed that the usage of the recycling sites is monitored over the next 12 months until the start of the new contract. Following the introduction of the kerbside glass collection, the impact on the glass collected at recycling sites will be monitored and where this decreases significantly, the glass banks will be withdrawn.
1.7.55 It is also proposed that the kerbside collection will include beverage cartons and therefore the council will no longer be eligible for carton banks provided by Tetrapak. All five of these banks will therefore be subject to a recommendation to be withdrawn. Currently funding from Tetrapak has not been confirmed for 2013/14 yet so the banks may need to be withdrawn before the start of the contract.
1.7.56 It is recommended that the land owners of the current recycling sites are contacted prior to the withdrawal of the banks to encourage them to work with the existing charity providers to maintain the textile recycling banks.
1.7.57 All Ward Members and Parish Councils will be contacted prior to any banks being withdrawn at any of the sites to discuss the proposals and help communicate information to local residents.
1.7.58 Black Sack Collections - As part of the new waste collection contract, it is proposed to review the properties which are currently provided with a weekly collection of waste in black sacks.
1.7.59 It is recommended that the households which have sufficient storage space and can accommodate a food waste bin, would be offered a weekly collection of food waste and a fortnightly collection of black sacks for their residual waste.
1.7.60 It is proposed that the results of the review would be discussed with the residents concerned to ensure that there are no problems with the bagged waste being stored and that they are happy to use the food waste service.
1.7.61 By separating the food waste from the residual waste, animals are less likely to be attracted to the waste and the incidences of spillage are likely to be significantly reduced.
1.8 Alternative Action and why not Recommended
1.8.1 The Best Value Review identified a wide range of actions which would contribute to the ongoing improvement of the waste services. Alternative options were appraised at the time of the review and were rejected at that point as they did not meet the needs of the council and local taxpayers.
1.8.2 The current arrangements have also been highlighted as a significant health and safety concern of the HSE inspectors. Therefore the council would be at risk of facing HSE enforcement action if no action is taken to improve the service.
1.8.3 The council could continue to operate the current garden waste collection arrangements allowing all households to present compostable bags when required, however the cost to operate this service is likely to increase with the new contract. The contractor would be required to provide a fleet of vehicles sufficient to service 60,000 households rather than the 16,500 households estimated to use the scheme.
1.8.4 Neither Ashford nor Swale Borough Council’s intend to introduce a borough-wide garden sack collection but are considering allowing the collection of bags from exempt properties who are unable to store wheeled bins. It is therefore recommended that a uniform approach is offered across the partnership authorities.
1.8.5 The council could continue to provide all wheeled bins to developers free of charge, however this encourages them to use wheeled bins rather than larger metal bins, for which the council already levies a charge of £300 per bin to cover the cost of the bin, delivery and future maintenance.
1.8.6 Options 1 and 2 for the Bin Replacement Strategy could be considered however charging all householders for repeated replacement bins or charging for delivery and administration costs would be difficult to administer. In addition these options are not likely to be well received by the public and difficult to determine whether the resident is responsible for the loss or damage to the bin.
1.8.7 The current Saturday Freighter service could be altered or withdrawn as it is in direct conflict with the council’s Waste Strategy. These remain as options for future consideration which will be possible as this service has not been included in the new waste contract in order to retain flexibility for future development.
1.8.8 The Saturday Freighter service is in direct, which looks to reduce the waste unnecessarily sent for disposal.
1.8.9 It is not recommended that the council maintains the existing provision of recycling sites as following the expansion of the mixed recycling collections to include glass and beverage cartons, the requirement for recycling sites will be significantly reduced. The cost to operate these banks will therefore be considerably greater than the benefit gained from their presence.
1.8.10 If all properties with a sack collection retain a weekly service, the cost for Maidstone is likely to be greater than the service for Ashford and Swale Borough Council’s who intend to adopt this policy. It is important to encourage those households using sacks to separate out their food waste as this will reduce the likelihood of the waste attracting animals.
1.9 Impact on Corporate Objectives
1.9.1 Corporate and Customer Excellence – has value for money council services that residents are satisfied with.
1.9.2 For Maidstone to be a decent place to live – is a clean and attractive environment for people who live in or visit the borough.
1.10 Risk Management
1.10.1 A risk assessment of the recommendation has been carried out and is attached in Appendix G of the report.
1.11 Other Implications
1.11.1
|
1. Financial
|
x
|
|
2. Staffing
|
|
|
3. Legal
|
|
|
4. Equality Impact Needs Assessment
|
|
|
5. Environmental/Sustainable Development
|
|
|
6. Community Safety
|
|
|
7. Human Rights Act
|
|
|
8. Procurement
|
|
|
9. Asset Management
|
x |
1.11.2 Financial – maintaining the compostable bag service is likely to have a significant financial impact on the service through increased contract costs of providing the garden service to all households rather than those subscribing to the service.
In addition the replacement of wheeled bins is a significant financial concern to the council and whilst this report seeks to address these concerns, consideration of additional policies may be required in the future to reduce this risk further.
1.11.3 Asset Management – As mentioned above, further work is likely to be required regarding the management of the council’s wheeled bins as the ongoing replacement of these assets has put an increasing financial strain on the council. This report has sought to limit these costs however further work may be required once the new collection contract is in place.
1.12 Relevant Documents
1.12.1 Appendices
1.12.2 Appendix A – Overview of Recommendations
1.12.3 Appendix B – Scrutiny Committee Recommendation Action and Implementation Plan (SCRAIP) - Making Waste Work for Maidstone Review
1.12.4 Appendix C – Garden waste Process Chart
1.12.5 Appendix D – Pricing Structure
1.12.6 Appendix E – Communication and Marketing Plan
1.12.7 Appendix F – Options appraisal – charging for wheeled bins
1.12.8 Appendix G - Risk Management Strategy
1.12.9 Background Documents
1.12.10 Best Value Review of Waste and Recycling
1.12.11 Analysis of Saturday freighter service
|
How to Comment Should you have any comments on the issue that is
being considered please contact either the relevant Officer or the Member
of the Executive who will be taking the decision. Cllr Mrs Marion Ring Cabinet
Member for the Environment Telephone:
01622 686492 E-mail:
marionring@maidstone.gov.uk Jennifer Gosling Waste
Collection Manager Telephone:
01622 602400 E-mail:
jennifergosling@maidstone.gov.uk