Agenda item
Managing the Public Realm
Members will receive a presentation providing an update on the project. This will include:-
· Objectives and scope of the contract
· Procurement process
· The timetable
· Progress to date
Minutes:
Michael Read (Assistant Director – Environment and Protection, Environment and Neighbourhood Services) gave a presentation on managing the public realm project and informed the committee that he was a member of its’ Project Board. Members heard that the new public realm contract would include waste and recycling, street cleaning, grounds maintenance in parks and Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) sites and burial services. The vision of the project was to improve the look and feel of the borough, especially as the services provided were the most visible to residents. It was imperative to generate less waste and to improve sustainability and a holistic approach would be taken. Current spending on these services was around £16.4m a year and the savings target for the project was £1.35m a year, a saving of around 10%. A further issue was posed by the rapidly increasing population that would present challenges in keeping down total waste and it was noted that there had been a 10% growth in households, 82% increase in private renting and 11% increase social renting. In addition, a large percentage of the population did not speak English as their first language, whilst in some wards, around 10% of the population had been in living the UK for two years or less. Michael Read emphasised that it was importance that residents had a sense of belonging as they were more likely to participate in recycling and reducing waste and the waste contractors would be encouraged to work with local residents.
Michael Read stated that other issues to consider included the impact on the population of welfare reforms and the high expectations on the standard of parks. As there was currently no waste depot in operation in the borough, the costs of sending waste to another depot outside Brent were higher. However, the recent acquisition of a depot in Alperton was likely to help bring costs down. Initial discussions to share a public realm contract with the London boroughs (LB) of Barnet, Hounslow and Richmond had led to the possibility of a joint contract between LBs Barnet and Brent. However, LB Barnet was ultimately unable to continue towards a collaboration, meaning LB Brent would be pursuing its own contract. The tendering process would be through competitive dialogue, following which five tenderers had been invited to outline their solutions to the tender brief by 8 March 2013. Following an evaluation of the proposals, some tenderers would then be invited back to provide more detailed solutions by 13 May 2013. Two tenderers would then be selected to submit their final proposals in August 2013 with the contract awarded in October 2013 to commence from April 2014. Members heard that 60% of the evaluation criteria would be weighted for quality issues and 40% for cost and commercial factors. Consideration would be given to structuring recycling incentives into the contract, such as providing smaller residual bins.
Councillor J Moher (Lead Member for Highways and Transportation) added that consultation would take place with councillors over priorities and options for the public realm contract and a key element would include cleaner streets. The acquisition of the waste depot was important for the borough. With regard to the tendering process, competitive dialogue provided a good opportunity to engage with potential contractors as to what they could do. Councillor J Moher added that LB Barnet had quite a different approach as to what they envisaged for the public realm contract, which was why the two boroughs had gone their separate ways.
During discussion by committee, the importance of communicating with residents concerning waste and recycling was stressed, particularly those where English was not their first language. It was commented that bins were often overflowing, whilst dumping of bulky waste was also occurring and it was asked when the bulky waste fee applied. One member welcomed consideration of an option for the council to set up a tender for commercial waste services and sought further information on whether the costs of the new waste depot were being absorbed. It was enquired whether the recycling of materials would be done by the council itself as opposed to the contractor and what was the possibility of the council building its own recycling plant. Another member commented that there were reports of residents being charged to use the Twyford waste site. In noting the increase in the number of families in privately rented accommodation, it was queried whether an increase in dumping could be attributed to there being no ‘too large for the bin’ service being available at tenanted properties and what was being done to address this.
Another issue raised by members concerned the rise in beds in sheds that would impact upon the amount of waste generated and on recycling and it was suggested that this could be addressed through the appropriate licensing. In noting that five tenderers would selected at the outline stage to submit their proposals for the public realm contract, it was enquired whether it was feasible to select different contractors for various services under the public realm depending on areas where they had scored highest in the bidding process. Details were also sought regarding how much savings would be made by bringing together services under the public realm contract and the reduction in savings as a result of the collaboration with LB Barnet not going ahead. Information was also asked in respect of staff implications and possible redundancies.
In reply to the issues raised by members, Michael Read advised that there was no charge for bulky waste collection unless it involved construction materials. Approaches were also being made to landlords and houses in multiple occupation concerning how waste was dealt with and of the need to recycle. Presently, businesses were responsible for making their own commercial waste collection arrangements, however commercial waste would be offered as an option in the contract tender. Michael Read stated that residents expected clean streets and consideration needed to be given as to whether to adopt a frequency based or standards based cleaning regime. Consideration may also be given as to whether the community could assist in maintaining cleanliness. Keeping green spaces clean was also of considerable importance. In respect of burials, Michael Read acknowledged that this was an area that needed to be treated sensitively and members noted that the council also ran this service on behalf of LB Harrow.
Michael Read advised that the business case for using the Alperton depot had factored in £270k savings a year and acquisition of the depot was self-financing. Presently, the waste contractor undertook responsibility for selling recyclable material and members were advised that recycling plants dealt with recycling in large scale. In view of this, it was more appropriate that recycling be undertaken by the West London Waste Authority (WLWA). With regard to the Twyford waste site, Michael Read advised that this was operated by WLWA and its commercial waste charges helped bridge the financial gap and prevent non WLWA residents from dumping there. With regard to tenanted properties not having access to the ‘too large for a bin service’, he stated that this matter would be looked into. Members heard that by bringing various services together under a single public realm contract, around £500k savings would be made, although this would have been greater if the collaboration with LB Barnet had proceeded. However, the public realm contract would lead to improved quality of services, cleanliness and the community would benefit from a joined-up approach. With regard to staff implications, Michael Read informed the committee that around 70 council staff were affected by the proposals and it was likely that Parks and Services staff would be subject to TUPE arrangements. In respect of monitoring staff arrangements, these were yet to be finalised.
Councillor J Moher added that consideration may be need to be given to publicising the fact that commercial waste was subject to charges, such as notification in the Brent Magazine.