Household Waste Recycling Centre Review Consultation Background Document
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Household Waste
Recycling Centre Review Consultation Background Document
Staffordshire County Council
Household Waste Recycling Centre Review
Executive Summary
This review of household waste recycling facilities has shown that two of the county’s
14 facilities could potentially be closed without undue detriment to the service as a
whole. Further to the information set out in this report it is proiosed the following two
sites are considered under the consultation process, for closure:
• Burntwood HWRC (in Lichfield District)
• Biddulph HWRC (in Staffordshire Moorlands District)
Closure of both these sites would result in a direct saving of £311,000 per annum.
No other service reduction measures such as reduced opening hours or reduced
days of opening are recommended. It is also proposed that the planned expansion
of the service such as increased opening hours, acceptance of trade waste and the
introduction of reuse centres at selected sites be continued.
In response to the information set out in this report, Mark Winnington, Cabinet
Member for Economy and Infrastructure says:
“In December 2013 there was a commitment by Cabinet that Household Waste and
Recycling Centres would not be closed where there would be a detrimental effect on
communities. The work already carried out as part of this review makes clear that
the communities of Burntwood and Biddulph can be well serviced by alternative
HWRCs which are close to those locations and provide suitable facilities. We have a
duty to ensure that we are not only providing the facilities to enable people access to
appropriate infrastructure and services, but to provide value for money for every
taxpayers’ pound we spend.”
1.0 Background
Staffordshire County Council has a statutory duty to arrange for places to be provided at which persons resident in its area may deposit their household waste (known as Household Waste Recycling Centres) as part of a number of requirements set out in the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990). In terms of the spatial distribution of Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC), under Section 51 of the EPA 1990 there is a requirement that “each place is situated within the area of the authority or so as to be reasonably accessible to persons resident in its area”. Waste Disposal Authorities across England are able to make choices on what is considered to be ‘reasonably accessible’ depending on local circumstances and priorities. Furthermore, Government body Waste Resources Action Programme (WRAP) who published a guide on HWRC’s in 20121, have set out the following guidance for provision of HWRCs: “ reasonable minimum levels of HWRC provision, with some exceptions for very rural or very urban areas” will be:
• Maximum catchment radii for a large proportion of the population: 3 to 5 miles (very rural areas: 7 miles).
• Maximum driving times for the great majority of residents in good traffic conditions: 20 minutes (very rural areas: 30 minutes).
• Maximum number of inhabitants per HWRC (in all but the most urbanised areas): 120,000.
• Maximum number of households per HWRC (in all but the most urbanised areas): 50,000.
Staffordshire County Council currently operates 14 Household Waste recycling
Centres (HWRCs) through a contract with FCC Environmental Ltd. This contract was
awarded in August 2013 and runs for an initial period of 11 years (with the option for
Staffordshire County Council to extend for a further 5 years). Additionally,
Staffordshire County Council has another site which is provided under joint working
arrangements with Warwickshire County Council. The site is located just over the
administrative border of Warwickshire and serves the residents of Tamworth
Borough. It serves as an excellent example of shared facilities and costs.
The number and location of existing HWRCs in Staffordshire is largely based on a
variety of historical factors, with many of them located for convenience in the vicinity
of former landfill sites or at former Council depots. As a result, some areas have
more sites and some have less than others. A map showing all the sites within
1 Waste Resources Action Programme (2012) HWRC Guide accessed February 4
th 2014.
http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/INH0449_HWRC_Guide_%20final.pdf
Staffordshire as well as neighbouring authorities is provided below as plan 1.
Plan 1. Location of HWRCs in Staffordshire and surrounding areas.
Staffordshire is bordered by 12 waste disposal authorities and their policies
regarding cross border movement of waste is detailed in table 1.0 below. Those
highlighted in yellow show restrictions for Staffordshire residents.
WDA Cross Border Waste Acceptance
Cars Vans / Trailers
Birmingham No restrictions currently in place Permit Scheme for residents only
Cheshire East No restrictions currently in place Permit Scheme for residents only
Derbyshire No restrictions currently in place Height Barriers are in place – this is to keep out trade users. No permits in place or requirement to prove residency.
Dudley No restrictions currently in place Height barriers require appointments. Residents only.
Leicestershire
Shropshire No restrictions currently in place Restricted Permit Scheme for residents only
Stoke on Trent No restrictions currently in place Permit Scheme available for residents of Stoke on Trent City Council & Staffordshire County Council
Telford & Wrekin No restrictions currently in place Permit Scheme for residents only
Walsall No restrictions currently in place Height barriers require appointments. Proof of borough residency required.
Warwickshire No restrictions currently in place Permit Scheme available for residents of Warwickshire and Staffordshire County Councils only
Wolverhampton No restrictions currently in place Permit Scheme for residents only
Worcestershire Proof of residency required Permit Scheme for residents only
Table 1.1 Cross border movements of waste – WDA policies.
The nature of the facilities has changed over recent years with a move towards them
being used primarily as recycling centres. In part this has been as a result of District
council kerbside collection services increasing dramatically over time with the sites
now being used predominantly for those items that cannot be recycled at the
kerbside. The HWRC facilities are therefore not intended to be used on a frequent
basis for wastes that are already collected at the kerbside. The majority of visits
should therefore by for bulky or larger items; items that are not generated on a
frequent basis.
In December 2013, as part of the Authority’s budget planning process, Staffordshire
County Council took the decision to review the network of HWRC’s with a view to
rationalising provision throughout the County within the financial year 2014/15 where
it could be demonstrated that there would be no detrimental effect on communities.
A reduction in the number of sites will result in financial savings through reduced
operating costs. However, this will clearly need to be balanced against the need to
retain a network of facilities well able to cope with demand and well placed to serve
the needs of the local community. In order to meet the savings required, it is
proposed that 2 of the 14 sites currently provided are considered for closure.
2.0 Introduction
The purpose of this report is to consider which of the 14 HWRC facilities should be
recommended for closure on the basis that such closures will minimise the impact to
residents of each district and Staffordshire as a whole.
The review will consider the following key factors:
i) Number of households and population
ii) Tonnage and Site Usage
iii) Location of alternative sites
This will include consideration of Staffordshire’s existing HWRC
network as well as neighbouring districts, any existing policies and
routes between facilities
iv) Any other relevant considerations such as drive times
To begin with any Districts with none or only one site in their boundary will be
excluded from the evaluation. This therefore precludes the Leycett site in Newcastle-
Under-Lyme and Tamworth which is served by a jointly funded site in Warwickshire.
As such, the remaining facilities under consideration are:
Staffordshire Moorlands - Cheadle, Leek, Biddulph
South Staffordshire - Wombourne, Bilbrook
Stafford - Stafford, Stone
Lichfield - Lichfield, Burntwood
East Staffordshire - Uttoxeter, Burton
Cannock Chase - Cannock, Rugeley
This report is intended to provide recommendations on which 2 facilities should be
closed based upon statistical and operational justifications.
2.1 How do we compare nationally?
Out of 29 County Councils throughout England and Wales, Staffordshire ranks 16th highest in respect to the number of HWRCs provided (Graph 1.0). This means we are currently providing more sites than many of our peer authorities.
Graph 1.0 County Council Household Waste Recycling Centre Provision 2012/13
However it is recognised that geography and population play a significant part in the provision of sites and so to put this into context in light of the guidance set out by WRAP, a drive time map was created for the current sites to understand the extent to which the existing provision does or does not meet or exceeds the recommendations. This is presented in Appendix 1. Current provision shows clearly that the vast majority of households within the
County are well within 20 minutes’ – 30 minutes’ drive time of a HWRC.
Furthermore the numbers of households per HWRC for the whole County currently
stand at 26,171 and population per HWRC at 60,866. Both of these are well below
the maximum.
With only 12 sites the figures are still below the maximum recommendations as
follows:
• 71,010 people per HWRC
• 30,536 households per HWRC
3.0 Site Assessments
Each of the existing 14 sites is outlined and considered in further detail below. The
location of each site is shown on plan 1
3.1 Cannock Chase District
Cannock Chase has a population of approximately 97,462 living in 41,780
households. There are two facilities in the district, one at Cannock and one in
Rugeley. Over the last 3 years an average of 12,800 tonnes per annum was taken
into both sites.
Both Cannock and Rugeley are the main centres of population within the
administrative boundary of Cannock Chase District
Cannock HWRC
Cannock HWRC is a large split level site which is the busiest of all the HWRCs in
Staffordshire; accepting in the region of 9,600 tonnes per annum. The facility is
situated in a population centre with good transport links. It is next to the large
Poplars landfill site, owned and operated by Biffa. Entrance to the site is off a short
road off of the main A460.
In the event of its closure, the nearest alternative site would be at Burntwood
approximately 3.6 miles away. Whilst this distance would still be within the confines
of what is recommended, the site is the busiest site within Staffordshire and its
closure would therefore have a significant impact on those other sites in the
surrounding area. Furthermore, Cannock HWRC has been identified one of the sites
which will benefit from longer opening hours as part of the new HWRC contract.
This would help support changes elsewhere.
Rugeley
Having been refurbished at a cost of £250,000 in early 2011, Rugeley HWRC has a
throughput in the region of 3,200 tonnes per annum. Whilst this throughput is one of
the lowest in the County, its proximity to a main centre of population means it
provides 23,000 people with a site within easy reach.
In the event of its closure, the nearest alternative site would be at Cannock which is
7.1 miles away. This is above the recommended distance of 3 – 5 miles (urban
setting).
Therefore, given the spatial distribution and location of Rugeley it is not considered
suitable for closure.
3.2 East Staffordshire District
East Staffordshire has a population of approximately 113,583 living in 49,110
households. There are two facilities in the district, one at Uttoxeter and one in
Burton upon Trent. Over the last 3 years an average of 10,455 tonnes per annum
was taken across both sites.
Uttoxeter
This relatively small site is situated at Pennycroft Lane in Uttoxeter and close to a
nearby housing estate. It has a throughput of approximately 2,800 tonnes per
annum which is the smallest throughput of all the HWRCs. However, the site is
located at a key population centre of approximately 14,000, with the nearest
alternative HWRC some 9 miles away in Staffordshire Moorlands.
Given the distance to the next nearest site is beyond what would be classed as
recommended for a large population centre, closure of Uttoxeter is not considered
for recommendation at this time.
Burton
Situated next Shobnall Road in Burton, adjacent to an SCC depot the site is the third
largest site in terms of throughput. It sits in the heart of an urban population of
approximately 67,000 and is the third largest site in terms of throughput at 7,300
tonnes. The next nearest site to Burton is situated in South Derbyshire some 4 miles
away. Whilst there are no residency restrictions in place for the site in Derbyshire,
no reciprocal arrangements exist either and therefore any impact upon a
neighbouring authority would need to be quantified and considered.
The nearest Staffordshire County Council operated site is Uttoxeter which is some
14 miles away. Clearly, for a large centre of population this is well in excess of the
recommended limits.
Given the high throughput, large centre of population and distance to the nearest
alternative site the HWRC at Burton is not considered appropriate for closure as part
of this review.
3.3 Lichfield District
Lichfield has a population of approximately 100,654 living in 43,310 households.
There are two facilities in the district, one in Lichfield and one in Burntwood. Over
the last 3 years an average of 10,696 tonnes per annum was taken into both sites.
Lichfield
The site at Lichfield is adjacent to the SCC depot in Lichfield and has an annual
throughput of approximately 6,400 tonnes which is the fourth largest in the County.
It sits in the urban centre of Lichfield City which has a population of approximately
33,500, with the nearest alternative site just under 7 miles away in Burntwood.
With a significantly large centre of population, third largest throughput site and much
longer distance to the next alternative site, Lichfield HWRC is not considered
appropriate for closure as part of this review.
Burntwood
The site is located on an industrial park and has an annual throughput of
approximately 3,700 tonnes. The population of Burntwood is approximately 30,000
and the nearest alternative site is 3.6 miles away at Cannock, well within the spatial
distribution recommendations set out by WRAP. The next closest site, whilst outside
of the recommended distance for an urban setting, is just less than 7 miles away in
Lichfield.
In 2009/10 plans were announced to close the site. These plans were subsequently
abandoned however, following objections after a decision had been taken.
Whilst it serves a large centre of population, its throughput is comparatively small,
together with its close proximity to large alternative sites there is evidence to support
the suggestion closure of this site would have the least impact on spatial distribution
of Household Waste Recycling Centres serving the residents of Staffordshire. As
part of this report however, and through the consultation process, the aim is to set
out the rationale behind the recommendations and listen to concerns during the
consultation phase.
3.4 South Staffordshire
South Staffordshire has a population of approximately 108,131 living in 45,870
households. There are two facilities in the district, both situated in the south of the
district, one at Bilbrook and one in Wombourne. Over the last 3 years an average of
7,244 tonnes per annum was taken into both sites
Bilbrook
The site is situated on the outskirts of Codsall, a population centre of approximately
8,000 and has a throughput of 3,800 tonnes per annum. Although it is located close
to the boundary of Wolverhampton formal survey work in 2009 was undertaken by
the Council’s Policy Research Team the results of which showed that cross
boundary movement of waste was recorded at only 9%. The site is used by
residents from other areas of South Staffordshire.
The nearest alternative site for the population centre of Bilbrook is 4 miles away in
Wolverhampton. Whilst this is within the recommended travelling distance, no
arrangements are in place for Staffordshire residents to use the Wolverhampton site.
The second closest site would therefore be at Wombourne some 10 miles away,
outside of the recommended maximum travelling distance. Furthermore the site
throughput demonstrates that the site is well used by a small population centre,
suggesting that residents from outside of Bilbrook utilise this site.
Closure of the site would be outside of the scope of recommended travelling
distances for residents in the area without putting in place a reciprocal arrangement
with Wolverhampton City Council.
Wombourne
Wombourne HWRC is situated next to a former landfill site close to the border of
Dudley. The population centre of Wombourne is approximately 16,500 and the site
receives an average annual throughput of approximately 3,200 tonnes. The next
closest site is some 6.5 miles away in Dudley. No reciprocal arrangements are in
place for Staffordshire residents to take waste into a site operated by Dudley
Council.
Formal survey work in 2009 was undertaken by the Council’s Policy Research Team
the results of which showed that cross boundary movement of waste was recorded
as 24% from Dudley and 3% from Wolverhampton (i.e. 876 tonnes). Therefore the
large majority of waste is from Staffordshire. Any reciprocal arrangements made
with Dudley would not be to Staffordshire’s benefit.
Closing Wombourne HWRC as part of this review would result in distances in excess
of those recommended being incurred by south Staffordshire residents to use an
alternative Staffordshire County Council site.
3.5 Stafford Borough
Stafford Borough has a population of approximately 130,689 living in 56,660
households. There are two facilities in the district, one in Stafford and one in Stone.
Over the last 3 years an average of 12,434 tonnes per annum was taken into both
sites.
Stafford
Stafford HWRC is situated on the Astonfields Industrial Estate in the northern part of
Stafford next to a former landfill site. It has good transport links and has the second
largest throughput for any HWRC within the County at c.7,700 tonnes per annum.
As such, the Stafford HWRC serves a large population centre population of
approximately 68,500 residents, with the nearest alternative situated at Stone a little
over 6 miles away. As one of the largest sites, under the new HWRC contract
Stafford is proposed to benefit from additional opening times.
Given the large population centre and throughput of the Stafford site any closure
would have significant impacts upon surrounding sites. Under the recommendations
given by WRAP, the nearest alternative would be over and above the maximum
travelling distance for such a large urban population.
Stone
Stone is situated in the north of Stafford Borough a little over 6 miles from Stafford
and approximately 9 miles south of Stoke on Trent. With a population centre of
some 16,500 people the HWRC site has an annual throughput of around 3,500
tonnes.
Built in 2007 Stone HWRC is one of the newest facilities within Staffordshire and is
situated on a small industrial site. Stone is also proposed to benefit from additional
opening hours under the new HWRC contract. Closure of the Stone HWRC site
would result in residents within this relatively urban area travelling at least 6 miles to
an alternative. It is therefore not considered suitable for closure.
3.6 Staffordshire Moorlands
Largely rural in nature, Staffordshire Moorlands has a population of approximately
97,106 living in 43,430 households. There are three HWRC facilities in the district,
one in Leek, one in Cheadle and one in Biddulph. Over the last 3 years an average
of 12,300 tonnes per annum was taken across all sites. Because of the rural nature
of much of Staffordshire Moorlands, recommended drive times and travelling
distances to HWRCs will naturally be slightly higher than compared to urban areas
(see point 2.1).
Leek
The HWRC is situated at Ball Haye Green in Leek. It is situated next to a former
landfill site and an operational transfer station, used to bulk domestic waste delivered
by the Staffordshire Moorlands District Council.
Throughput of the site is in the region of 4,900 tonnes per annum, with a population
centre of 20,000 in Leek itself.
Whilst Leek itself is a small densely populated town, it is surrounded by a rural
setting with longer distances between population centres. It is a strategically placed
site which services a large population centre and the next nearest site is just over 9
miles away in Biddulph. For these reasons Leek is not considered suitable for
closure.
Cheadle
The HWRC is situated on a small industrial park in Cheadle. The population centre
of Cheadle is 11,500 and the site has an annual throughput of 2,700 tonnes. Whilst
a relatively small throughput, the site is located such that it is in a relatively large
population centre and serves the southern portion of the largely rural Staffordshire
Moorlands. If this site were to close, the distance to the next nearest site is almost 9
miles which is above the maximum recommended distance for rural areas.
Therefore it is not recommended that Cheadle be considered for closure.
Biddulph
Situated next to a former landfill site, the HWRC at Biddulph has an annual
throughput of 4,500 tonnes and is situated within a population centre of 18,000
people. Given its proximity to households, there is an active liaison group at
Biddulph who meet on a regular basis with SCC and HWRC contractor. The group
has been in existence since the operation of the landfill site many years ago and has
raised a number of issues with the HWRC including noise and litter. The HWRC has
an average throughput compared to other sites serving similar population centres
(for example Leek) but is within 4 miles of an alternative site within Stoke on Trent
district. Furthermore, SCC has a reciprocal arrangement with Stoke on Trent City
Council for residents to use their sites.
Closure of the Biddulph HWRC would result in the large population centre of
residents currently served by the HWRC still only having to travel within the
recommended travelling distances to an alternative site. Furthermore Staffordshire
Moorlands District would retain 2 HWRC sites.
It is therefore proposed that Biddulph HWRC be considered for closure.
4.0 Distances and Drive Times
In order to further consider the information given in the site assessments above,
table 4.0 below highlights each sites annual throughput, population centres at each
site, distance to the next nearest available site and second nearest alternative site.
District HWRC Location Annual
Throughput
Population
Centre
Distance to
closest
alternative site
(Miles)
Distance to the
second
alternative site
(Miles)
Cannock 9,600 67,700 3.6 6.2 CCDC
Rugeley 3,200 23,000 7.1 7.3
Uttoxeter 2,800 14,000 8.9 10.2* ESBC
Burton upon Trent 7,300 67,000 3.6 11.0
Lichfield 6,400 33,500 6.8 8.7* or 9.9 LDC
Burntwood 3,700 30,000 3.6 6.1* or 6.8
Bilbrook 3,800 8,000 4.0* 9.9 SSDC
Wombourne 3,200 16,500 6.4* 9.9
Stafford 7,700 68,500 6.1 10.8 SBC
Stone 3,600 16,500 6.1 9.5
Leek 4,900 20,000 9.1 10.4*
Cheadle 2,700 11,500 8.9 10.2*
SMDC
Biddulph 4,500 18,000 4.0 7.5*
* denotes a HWRC site outside of Staffordshire where no reciprocal arrangements exist
# of miles – denotes those sites with the least mileage impact in terms of alternative site.
Table 4.0 Staffordshire HWRCs - Annual throughput, population centre served
and distance to next nearest site
Table 4.0 above supports findings in section 3, site assessments, in that provision of the proposed remaining 12 HWRCs, fits the criteria of “reasonable minimum levels of HWRC provision, with some exceptions for very rural or very urban areas” In particular:
• Maximum catchment radii for a large proportion of the population: 3 to 5 miles (very rural areas: 7 miles).
Minutes’ Drive Time
District 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Cannock Chase 44% 55% 1%
East Staffordshire 33% 53% 11% 3%
Lichfield 39% 44% 17% 0%
South Staffordshire 20% 46% 29% 6%
Stafford 18% 42% 28% 10% 3%
Staffordshire Moorlands 26% 39% 24% 8% 2%
Table 4.1 Proportion of residents in each district assessed, living within 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 and 35 minutes of another usable HWRC with 14 sites.
Minutes’ Drive Time
District 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Cannock Chase 36% 61% 3%
East Staffordshire 33% 53% 11% 3%
Lichfield 20% 38% 42%
South Staffordshire 21% 44% 29% 6%
Stafford 18% 42% 28% 10% 3%
Staffordshire Moorlands 23% 22% 24% 26% 2% 1% 2%
Table 4.2 Proportion of residents in each district assessed, living within 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 and 35 minutes of another usable HWRC if Biddulph and Burntwood HWRCs closed.
District Population
Number
of sites
Number of
residents per
HWRC
Number
of sites
Number of
residents per
HWRC
Cannock Chase 97462 2 48731 2 48731
East Staffordshire 113583 2 56792 2 56792
Lichfield 100654 2 50327 1 100654
South Staffordshire 108131 2 54066 2 54066
Stafford 130869 2 65435 2 65435
Staffordshire Moorlands 97106 3 32369 2 48553
Table 4.3 Number of residents per HWRC per district Table 4.1 shows at least 88% of residents can reach a site within 15 minutes (shown in Table 4.1). With the proposed changes, as outlined in Section 3 at least 80% of residents within each district can reach a site within 15 minutes (see Table 4.2) For the greatest proportion of residents in each district (up to 70%), Tables 4.1 and 4.2 above show the continued provision of 12 HWRCs as outlined in Section 3 would meet the with the maximum suggested drive times and numbers of inhabitants per HWRC outlined below:
• Maximum driving times for the great majority of residents in good traffic conditions: 20 minutes (very rural areas: 30 minutes)
• Maximum number of inhabitants per HWRC (in all but the most urbanised areas): 120,000
• Maximum number of households per HWRC (in all but the most urbanised areas): 50,000
The information shown in tables 4.1 and 4.2, is presented graphically in Appendix 4.
5.0 Fly-tipping
Research has shown there is a general concern amongst the population regarding
the impact of waste service changes on incidences of fly-tipping. It is therefore
important that the issue of fly-tipping is considered as part of the overall process.
Nationally there were 711,000 instances of fly-tipping recorded in England during
2012/13. The district/borough average was just over 1000 instances. By
comparison there were 1,705 instances of fly-tipping recorded across the districts
included in this review 2012/13.
Graph 5.1 below illustrates the levels of fly-tipping across those districts included in
the review. Overall, levels of fly-tipping in those areas are not considered
particularly high.
Graph 5.1 Fly-tipping Incidences recorded across Staffordshire Districts 2005
– 2013.
Furthermore, Environment Agency statistics show that more than 70% of incidences
in the UK are actually carried out by businesses that do not wish to pay for their
waste disposal.
Currently, 12 of Staffordshire HWRCs do not accept waste from businesses.
Therefore it is not anticipated that closure of two sites will directly lead to significant
increases in fly-tipping.
In addition, as part of the new HWRC contract, Staffordshire County Council’s
HWRC sites will be offering chargeable trade waste disposal and recycling services
to small businesses across the vast majority of sites. This will offer a greater
opportunity for those smaller businesses currently unable to access cost effect
solutions to do so, ultimately supporting a reduction in business waste fly-tipping.
Research also supports the fact that closure of a HWRC does not lead to increases
in fly-tipping (see Table 5.1) and in fact in some areas fly tipping incidents have
dropped.
When Where What Impact
2011 Telford Council Closure of 1 HWRC
No marked increase in
flytipping
2010
Lancashire
County Council Closed 4 HWRCs
Across the four effected
areas flytipping incidents
reduced by 20% in the three
months after closure
2004
Hertfordshire
County Council Closed 1 HWRC
In the three district council
areas affected, there was a
41% decrease in flytip
incidents in the three years
following closure of the site.
Table 5.1 Effects on fly tipping following the closure of HWRCs – other Local
Authority findings.
In 2007 Staffordshire County Council took the decision to reduce the opening days of
all its HWRC sites, fears that this would lead to increased fly-tipping were expressed
at the time, however such fears were left unfounded. This is particularly evident from
graph 5.1 which shows the number of fly tipping incidences since then has actually
decreased.
In any case, it is proposed that Staffordshire County Council will work closely with
the local district councils to ensure that areas around closed site are monitored
closely and enforcement action taken where necessary.
6.0 Savings
The direct savings associated with closure of sites are as follows:
Facility Annual Saving
Biddulph HWRC £154,000
Burntwood HWRC £157,000
Total £311,000
Achievable savings are an important factor, however these have not been
considered in isolation as closure of a particular site could result in higher costs
elsewhere. Furthermore costs need to be considered alongside the findings outlined
above in relation to spatial distribution, drive times and population centres.
7.0 Recycling Rates and Waste
An analysis of Government returns for all waste disposal and unitary authorities in
England for 2008/09 and 2009/10 identified local authorities that reported a different
number of HWRCs in each period. Tonnage data for the authorities reporting a
change in the numbers of HWRCs provided was analysed, and changes to total
HWRC tonnages over the same period were assessed. The findings of the analysis
are summarised in table 7.1 below:
Authority Periods compared
Change in the Number of HWRCs
Change in total HWRC throughput
Notes
Derbyshire 2008/09 & 2009/10
+1 +6.8% Buxton HWRC opened in August 2009
Hertfordshire 2008/09 & 2009/10
-1 -3.5% Tring HWRC closed in October 2009
Hillingdon 2008/09 & 2009/10
-1 -9.3% Rigby Lane Recycling Centre closed in November 2008
Kingston upon Hull
2007/08 & 2008/09
+1 +5.8% Sutton Fields HWRC opened in July 2008
Nottinghamshire 2008/09 & 2009/10
-1 -7.3% Danes Hill HWRC closed in April 2009
Or
Table 7.1: Summary of changes in number of HWRCs and HWRC throughputs for selected authorities in England Data source: WasteDataFlow Note: Kingston-upon-Hull reported an additional site in 2009/10, but in fact the new site opened in 2008/09; therefore the periods 2007/08 and 2008/09 were compared for Kingston-upon-Hull.
The analysis appears to show a consistent pattern, with the opening of new sites being associated with the generation of additional HWRC throughputs and the closing of sites being associated with decreases in HWRC throughputs. Analysis of bulky waste tonnages does not indicate that material is displaced between bulky-waste collections and HWRCs. It appears that opening a new site generally results in a 5–10% increase in total HWRC throughput, with a 5–10% reduction following closure of a site. However, this conclusion should be treated with great caution as many factors could be related to changes in HWRC throughputs. Therefore for the purposes of the review, no savings have been identified in relation to waste reduction.
8.0 Summary
Further to the information set out in this report it is proposed the following two sites
are considered under the consultation process, for closure:
• Biddulph HWRC (in Staffordshire Moorlands District)
• Burntwood HWRC (in Lichfield District)
Closure of both these sites would result in a direct saving of £311,000 per annum.
In response to the information set out in this report, Mark Winnington, Cabinet
Member for Economy and Infrastructure says:
“In December 2013 there was a commitment by Cabinet that Household Waste and
Recycling Centres would not be closed where there would be a detrimental effect on
communities. The work already carried out as part of this review makes clear that
the communities of Biddulph and Burntwood can be well served by alternative
HWRCs which are close to those locations and provide suitable facilities. We have a
duty to ensure that we are not only providing the facilities to enable people to be
independent and live their lives in the way they choose, but to provide value for
money for every taxpayers’ pound we spend.”
Appendix 1.
Appendix 2.
Appendix 3. Drive times by population % : Current HWRCs v’s
Proposed HWRCs
Related Documents
