Agenda item

The Chairman thanked the Policy and Performance Team Leader, Debra Kitching who was in attendance to speak to Members in relation to the Quarter 1, 2016/17 Performance Management Report (for copy see file of minutes).

The Policy and Performance Team Leader referred to the direction of travel and Members noted within this indicator set there were 4 behind target.  It was noted that a Council Plan action that had been delayed related to the draft Air Quality Action Plan for Chester-le-Street, from July 2016 to December 2016.

Councillors noted that some of the key achievements in Quarter 1, representing April to June 2016, included: diversion of 96% of municipal waste from landfill; levels of litter, dog fouling and detritus remain better than the national average; Operation “Stop It” continues, with 6 prosecutions in Quarter 1; and the latest road condition survey showed improvements in A, B and C roads where maintenance should be considered.

Members noted the target for the percentage of household waste to be re-used, recycled or composted was 38% and this was regularly achieved, and there were active programmes that included: the garden waste scheme with 7,500 more properties signed up; the green move out scheme, clearing up when students finish in June/July; and the “Good to Know” campaign.

It was explained that there was a slight increase in littering and dog fouling, however, both had hit target and were better than the England average.  Members noted a slight decrease in the number of Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) issued for environmental crime, however, there would be more Community Protection Notices (CPNs) coming through regarding these issues.

The Policy and Performance Team Leader explained as regards the actions to improve environmental cleanliness including: local events/campaigns such as “Big Spring Clean”; Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) for dog control; targeting of hot spots through the multi-agency partnership, including secondary fires at Peterlee; and legislation, in terms of investigating whether Community Protection Notices (CPNs) could be strengthened to include other aspects such as absentee landlords, to avoid Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) and have issues resolved at court.

It was explained that fly-tipping had increased, and it was noted that there were problems in terms of tipping of: white goods; household waste; green waste via small or transit sized vans; and construction waste via small or transit sized vans.  It was added that actions were being taken that included: the restructure of neighbourhood protection; rolling enforcement programmes bolstered by hotspot targeting; and research into the seizing of vehicles powers and attaching a Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO) if a prosecution is successful.

The Committee learned that the percentage of highways defects repaired within target had increased, though was below target.  It was added that this was in the context of an increase in the number of defects, with a year-on-year increase in category 1 and 2 highways defects impacting upon the Council’s ability to meet the target response times.  Members noted the 3 major improvement works ongoing, namely: Leazes Bowl Roundabout; Villa Real Bridge; and Wallnook Bridge.

The Policy and Performance Team Leader reported on the reduction in carbon emissions, from Local Authority operations and from across the Authority area.  It was added that activities included retrofitting of DCC buildings and also enabling school to access funding to implement energy efficiency measures.  Members noted that other activities included: 276 referrals to “Warm up North”; Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) grant to investigate the potential for district heating in Durham City; and a Community Energy follow up event, building upon a previous event in June.

The Chairman thanked the Policy and Performance Team Leader and asked Members if they had any questions on the report and presentation.

Councillor P May noted the performance in terms of highways repairs and asked whether it was true that there was a £120 million shortfall in terms of being able to complete all outstanding repairs.  The Highway Asset Manager, Brian Kitching noted that the Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) was published annually and that this included all aspects of the highways network such as the roads, footpaths, lighting, structures and so on.  It was added that the current backlog in terms of repairs was approximately £180 million and it was highlighted within the TAMP the funding required for a “steady state” of around £23 million per year, with current spending at around £18 million.  The Highway Asset Manager noted that there had been several positives in terms of good capital programmes carried out in the last few years, and that the quality of A, B and C roads had been prioritised over the last 10 years, with the unclassified network being less of a priority and this may be an area to look at in the future.  Councillors J Armstrong and P Stradling both noted that the improvement works at Leazes Bowl had improved the time it took to get across the city and the Chairman asked the Highway Asset Manager to thank all involved in the project.

Councillor C Kay noted that in terms of carbon emissions, he understood that Government were recording particles at PM2.5, rather than PM10 and asked whether this was correct.  He then continued by commenting that he had followed an Enviro 5 Bus through Bishop Auckland and felt that he had been subjected to a high volume of emissions from the vehicle and asked for clarification as to whether major towns in the county such as Bishop Auckland met current emission requirements.  The Policy and Performance Team Leader noted she would speak to the Officers involved and get back to the Member accordingly.

Councillor G Holland noted that the target in terms of household waste being re-used, recycled or composted was being met, however the energy generation from waste had fallen and asked whether this was a local glitch or was there a specific reason for this decrease.

The Head of Projects and Business Services noted the charge for garden waste collection, and that this could have impacted upon waste stream, as this may then have been composted for example.  It was added that the percentage of recycling had reduced slightly, however the volume of waste had increased.  Councillor G Holland asked was waste not converted to energy at the SITA sites.  The Head of Projects and Business Services explained that the conversion to energy was already ahead of target and that the sites were allowed flexibility in order to manage issues such as maintenance.  Councillor G Holland noted that the drop in energy output reported was huge and that the loss was significant as it represented more that the amount generated by other renewables.  The Head of Projects and Business Services noted that it represented a high tonnage of waste and was a loss for all the plants, as within their contracts there was more profit for more energy produced as a means to encourage energy production from waste.  

Resolved:   

That the report and presentation be noted.