Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

Place Select Committee Minutes

Date:
Monday, 2nd November, 2015
Time:
2.00pm
Place:
Jim Cooke Conference Suite, Stockton Central library, Church Road, Stockton, TS18 1TU
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
Cllr Derrick Brown(In the Chair), Cllr Sonia Bailey, Cllr Evaline Cunningham, Cllr Ken Dixon, Cllr Maurice Perry, Cllr Rachael Proud, Cllr Mrs Sylvia Walmsley, Cllr Bill Woodhead
Officers:
Jamie McCann, Marc Stephenson, Andie Mackay, Dale Rowbotham, Craig Willows (CFYA), Graham Birtle, Jenna McDonald (LDS)
Item Description Decision
Public
PLA
26/15
EVACUATION PROCEDURE
The evacuation procedure was noted.
PLA
27/15
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest.
PLA
28/15
MINUTES FOR SIGNATURE - 20TH JULY 2015 AND 7TH SEPTEMBER 2015.
AGREED that the minutes were signed by the Chairman as a correct record.
PLA
29/15
DRAFT MINUTES - 5TH OCTOBER 2015
AGREED that the minutes be approved.
PLA
30/15
SCRUTINY REVIEW OF KERBSIDE WASTE COLLECTION
AGREED that the information be noted.
PLA
31/15
WORK PROGRAMME
AGREED that:

1. The information be noted

2. Site visits to recycling plants be arranged
PLA
32/15
CHAIR'S UPDATE
 

Preamble

ItemPreamble
PLA
28/15
The minutes of the meetings held on 20 July 2015 and 7 September 2015 were signed by the Chairman as a correct record.
PLA
29/15
Consideration was given to the draft minutes of the meeting held on 5 October 2015.
PLA
30/15
Members were provided with a presentation on Kerbside Waste Collection.

Additional points were highlighted as follows:

- The Kerbside Waste Collection Service was a key service which affected all residents of the Borough

- Significant consideration was given to suggestions and changes relating to Kerbside Waste Collection before any change was made implemented

- It was important to understand and monitor different views and behaviours towards recycling

Members raised the following points/questions:

- The Committee asked whether there was any particular reason for the net cost reduction of 1M in Domestic Refuge during 2012/13. It was highlighted that changes in net cost were due to the removal of Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation (NFFO) gate fee reduction

- Members raised concerns relating to the number of leaflets and flyers enclosed within newspapers, it was asked whether the local authority could enforce this issue. In response, it was noted that the local authority had no control over the matter and business generated a high level of income as a result of the advertisements found in newspapers

- With regard to the reduction in recyclables, the Committee were keen to understand whether or not the local authority had a task force in place which monitored those households that did not recycle. It was highlighted that in 2004 an education team existed that monitored household recycling and educated local people on recycling

- It was asked how green waste disposal costs compared to social domestic costs. Members heard that green waste was collected separately and attracted a much lower gate fee as diverting green waste was much more cost efficient when diverting per tonne than the cost involved in disposing per bin

- It was asked why raw vegetables cannot be recycled with the green waste material, the Committee noted that that recycling process took much longer when food waste was introduced. It was highlighted that an anaerobic digestion (AD) facility was needed to treat food waste and that no other authority within the Tees Valley operated a food waste programme

- Members asked whether the waste management contract was often reviewed in order to ensure that it was as efficient as possible. It was noted that the waste management contract was reviewed. The current contract was due to end in 2020

- The Committee asked whether consideration could be given to alternative methods of recycling and suggested a recycling method that involved three boxes on one set of wheels. In response, it was noted that while consideration was given to alternative methods, a lack of resources was a continuing problem. The Committee noted that the department would consider alternative methods on the market

- Members were keen to understand whether problems existed around contamination as a result of people using old recycling bags/boxes. It was noted that contamination did occur and was identified and sorted at the sorting stage at kerbside

- It was asked whether refuge waste collectors were responsible for clearing up waste that had blown out of recycling boxes/bags due to wind and bad weather conditions. Members noted that this responsibility was with the Street Cleaners

- Members were keen to compare and review types of containers used for recycling. It was noted that a review could take place focusing primarily on the cost of supplying alternative bins and containers
PLA
31/15
The Committee gave consideration to the work programme 2015-16.
PLA
32/15
The Committee noted that Councillor Cooke had left the Committee to take up the role of Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Transport on the Councils Cabinet. Members took the opportunity to acknowledge the significant contribution that Cllr Cooke had made to the work of the Committee and wished him well in his new role.

Can't find it

Can't find what you're looking for? Let us know and we'll do our best to point you in the right direction