Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of Peter Jeffreys (Head of Service Waste), Aimi Brookes (Service Development Manager – Waste) and Michael Leah (Assistant Director – Environmental Services, Climate Change & Integrated Passenger Transport, to seek views on the plans for the future harmonisation of waste and recycling services across North Yorkshire.

 

Some of the key points highlighted in the report were as follows:

 

·       A Waste Harmonisation Task and Finish Group, with representation from all of the council’s political groups, had been meeting regularly since November 2023 as the proposals and public consultation process had developed.

 

·       Discussions of the various options started three years ago, as it became clear that future funding for North Yorkshire from national government would depend on how efficient and effective the waste collection service is.

 

·       The current service includes:

o   Fully comingled – Craven, Scarborough – 1 wheelie bin

o   Twin stream – Hambleton (box & wheelie bin), Harrogate (boxes & bags, rolling out wheelie bin)

o   Kerbside sort - Richmondshire/ Ryedale - (boxes & bags)

o   Twin stream (alternate fortnightly) – Selby (2 wheelie bin)

o   Capacity varies from 115 litres to 295 litres per fortnight

 

·       A desktop options appraisal, looking at nine assessment criteria, found the alternate fortnightly option with two recycling wheeled bins (Selby model) scored the highest, followed by the kerbside sort option with three containers, with the fully comingled option scoring the lowest.

 

·       Previous experience in North Yorkshire is that changing from boxes/bags to wheelie bins does increase recycling. For example, comparison of kg/household in 2019/20 (pre covid) to 2023/24 (post covid) showed a big increase in Selby recycling rates following the service change.

 

·       The initial estimated cost of implementing the changes would be around £8 million over the next five years, but it is anticipated the alternate fortnightly collection option with two wheeled bins would save about £560,000 per year, with the potential for even more savings.

 

·       Wheelie bin systems require the fewest vehicles and staff due to the efficiency of collection.

 

·       One of the key findings from the ‘Let’s Talk Rubbish’ public consultation (over 10,000 responses) was the need for clear and concise communications with residents. Nearly nine in ten residents say it is ‘important’ or ‘very important’ to have access to an equal recycling service in North Yorkshire.

 

·       With regard to carbon modelling, all of the three options considered reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to the baseline. Kerbside sort saw the biggest reduction, followed by alternate fortnightly collections then fully comingled delivers the least benefit.

 

·       Officers are conscious that one size doesn’t fit all, and there are storage concerns around the two bin approach. Where there are genuine issues with storage or access for properties, bespoke/alternative collections will be provided. Approximately 7.5% of properties in North Yorkshire currently receive a sack collection or are classed as ‘hard to reach’.

 

·       The Malton area will be the first area for the rollout this summer, linked to the vehicle replacement programme requirements, with the rest of the county phased in over a two-to-three year period.

 

·       The work to date suggests the most efficient and effective way to collect recycling across North Yorkshire is the alternate fortnightly collection of 2 wheeled bins. This service:

o   Requires low vehicle and staffing numbers

o   Requires the least financial resources across a range of rebate values

o   Reduces greenhouse gas emissions

o   Meets existing criteria not to collect separately (subject to government policy review)

o   Meets residents preference for wheeled bin(s)

o   Is flexible so that all property types and access arrangements are either accommodated or provided with a bespoke solution.

 

Following this, significant points highlighted by committee members were:

 

·       Whether the online waste collection calendars and associated guidance for residents of the new collection approach would be ready to explain the changes in good time ahead of the new arrangements coming into force. In response, it was noted that Local Government Reorganisation had brought together waste officers from across the county with lots of experience of initiating service changes. The waste collection online calendars had been harmonised this year. Physical calendars were under consideration to assist residents, along with other communication methods such as text messaging and linking in with key local stakeholders such as the relevant elected member and the parish and town councils.

 

 

·       Members queried the level of engagement with key stakeholders such as the National Parks, the Planning Authority and the impact on occupiers of listed buildings.

 

·       Reference was made to the recent member visit to see the Selby refuse collections and the amount of bins brought out on collection days for crews to navigate.

 

·       Provision made within planning policy that all new planning applications require appropriate bin storage at new housing developments that reflects the agreed approach. It was noted that discussions have started with Planning team colleagues to reflect this in policy terms, for example to ensure access roads are accessible and fit for purpose for collection vehicles to operate in and out of.

 

·       Concerns were raised that the costs of providing alternative services to households unable to receive the standard two recycling wheeled bins has not been fully quantified and appraised. There was an assurance that officers will work with a local area as there is a need to be sensitive to different locations and also flexible enough to meet local housing types and access arrangements. It was noted that when the former Selby District Council moved from a box to a wheeled based scheme, approximately only an additional 50 (out of 40,000 properties) could not accept the two wheeled bin recycling service rolled out. Therefore the cost of additional bespoke arrangements is highly unlikely to significantly affect the financial assessment of the waste collection options.

 

·       Areas that currently use boxes and bags would be encouraged to reuse them for other purposes once the switch to wheeled bins has been carried out, otherwise the household waste recycling centres would accept them for recycling and excess stock offered to local organisations to make sure they are reused as much as possible.

 

 

·       Officers were referred to a recent decision by a neighbouring authority, to adopt comingled collections due to diminishing amounts of paper and card. Following the meeting, officers have reviewed publicly available documents and also spoken with respective officers and have established that residents in the neighbouring authority were issued with a small, wheeled bin insert called a caddy, for paper and card. It is felt that restricting the capacity of recycling containers would adversely affect the quantities of recycling collected.

 

·       How the move to a four day working week for the waste collection teams could be communicated most effectively to residents, with the suggestion that information is included within the annual Council Tax bills if appropriate. This idea would be considered.

 

 

Resolved - That the elected member feedback of the Transport, Economy, Environment and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee be fed into the Executive and Full Council reports to show the areas of concern raised, in particular around i) the financial modelling, ii) the future planning policy and iii) learning from other local authorities when deciding the household waste collection scheme to be adopted in the future.

 

 

Following this, the report on Allerton Waste Recovery Park (AWRP) performance was considered.

 

Some of the key points highlighted in the report were as follows:

 

·       AWRP consists of 3 technologies: Mechanical Treatment plant, Energy from Waste (EfW) plant, Anaerobic Digestor, plus Offices & Visitor centre. Services commenced 1 March 2018.

 

·       The facility has two main contractual targets; recycling or composting a minimum of 5% of Contract Waste and diversion of a minimum of 70% of Contract Waste away from landfill. Failure to achieve these targets leads to financial deductions. AWRP do recover plastics before material is burnt, this is a bespoke arrangement and helps.

 

 

·       Outside of reported targets the visitor centre welcomed over 2,800 visitors ranging in age from seven to ninety-two. The contractor had closely worked with Yorwaste, helping with their Christmas campaign and their upcycling Fashion Show launch. Community initiatives include sponsoring the local scout group in the Knaresborough Bed Race, Go Green for Halloween, working with the North Yorkshire Rotters, and donating fleeces and Hi-Viz jackets to local groups and litter pickers.

 

·       In relation to recent national news stories concerning waste incineration, it was noted that EfW technology was never seen as a permanent long-term solution that fixes all of the issues with waste disposal. With the move away from landfill, due to the harmful impact it can have on the environment, EfW is seen as a better alternative in this regard.

 

·       Attention still needs to be paid to the materials and packaging that consumers purchase in the shops and supermarkets. Some of this will begin to be addressed through the introduction of the Extended Producer Responsibility, making companies responsible for the disposal of their products, which in turn will help to meet the circular economy targets of the government.

 

Following this, key points raised by elected members were as follows:

 

·       The progress made during this current reporting year towards improving the recycling performance rate for 2024/25.

 

·       The financial deductions incurred by the operator as a result of not meeting the contractual targets at AWRP.

 

·       The implications of national policy changes such as the future introduction of the UK Emissions Trading Scheme.

 

It was resolved that the AWRP section of the report be noted, but that in future years a standalone annual report be provided to the committee.