Issue - meetings

To receive the report of the Strategic Director for Operations and a verabl update.

The Chair thanked the Head of Service – Operations for her report, which was taken as read.

The Head of Service – Operations responded to questions from Members in the following terms:

·        there was a clear process around dog fouling whereby there would be increased site visits where an issue was reported. Education and/or signage or stencilling could be utilised so that residents were aware that the authority was aware of the issue. There were no Public Space Protection Orders to allow fixed penalty notices therefore an education approach must be taken;

·        there was no feedback loop for reports of dog fouling, on firmstep at present but this was being worked on as it was in place for graffiti;

·        on the subject of weeds there were 4 mechanical sweepers with one being an HGV and the others able to be used on pavements where parking allowed. There was often detritus on the kerb line which was inaccessible but every street was on a 4-8 week rotational schedule. Where vehicles had an off-road instance this timescale could extend. These were large hoovers which did breakdown often but a maintenance contract was now in place which included replacing vehicles where there were substantive periods off-road. Weed removal was not the primary focus. There were new brushes in place which were designed to pull up weed growth. Arterial route clearance would be the focus. Reports of areas with a significant problem with weeds would be welcome. The brushes were designed for areas where the deep-clean teams could not make impact. The public could use the Contact Us form and councillors the Member Enquiry Process;

·        the report recognised that there had been a shortage of team leaders during the year and they were responsible for carrying out inspections. The statistics provided related to the inspection programme issues rather than an endemic issue in an area;

·        the team had very good working relationships with the university, who had fantastic litter wardens. There were historic issues but there was now a good working relationship with students as well as the university;

·        potholes did not cause issue to team vehicles as these travelled at 10mph or less in sweeping mode;

·        there was an holistic 3-pronged programme in place of enforcement, operation and education but resource levels dictated the level of educational delivery. Community Builder’s were encouraged to educate where possible;

·        recruitment had improved this year and there were only 2 vacancies currently which were advertised and expected to be filled. It wasn’t possible to achieve full budgetary spend due to vacancies. New recruitment approaches had not been utilised as they had not been required;

·        the litter bin request process was manual and team leaders collated and monitored but there could be gaps. If members were roads which required inspection they could alert the Head of Service; and

·        Recycling on the Go contents would still be delivered to the MRF and be sorted at source. The predominant capacity was paper and card but it was often so contaminated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 112