Agenda item

Councillor Champion, Executive Member for Environment, Air Quality & Transport presented their annual report to the committee.

They acknowledged the hard work of council officers, particularly in areas like energy services and active travel, highlighting recent achievements such as winning gold in the London in Bloom competition for health and wellbeing.

The Executive Member outlined key initiatives, including the planting of over 930 trees, investment in state-based recycling, and the launch of a liveable neighbourhood project aimed at improving urban spaces. They emphasised the importance of district heat networks in reducing energy costs and their team's commitment to overcoming challenges in climate action plans.

Progress was noted in reducing carbon emissions, increasing electric vehicle charging points, and enhancing cycling infrastructure. The Executive member mentioned ongoing efforts to improve recycling rates and food waste campaigns, while also addressing the needs of vulnerable residents concerning air pollution.

There had been collaborative efforts across various teams to create a coherent approach to sustainability, emphasising initiatives that focus on children-friendly environments and reducing flood risks. Overall, the presentation stressed the importance of community engagement and innovative strategies in achieving environmental and social goals.

Concerns were expressed regarding the perception of pollution in certain areas, particularly where shops and residents were located. It was acknowledged that intense work was being done that often went unnoticed, leading to misconceptions about pollution being concentrated in specific places. There was a noted need for clearer data to demonstrate the council's equity approach to addressing these issues. In response to pollution on main roads, it was acknowledged that these roads naturally had higher traffic and, consequently, more traffic pollution. However, it was noted that pollution levels across the borough had significantly improved. A study by a local university indicated that the implementation of three LTNs in the southern part of the borough had a more substantial positive impact on boundary roads than on internal roads.

Several points were raised, starting with the terminology used in discussions about road danger reduction. The term "accident" was mentioned in reference to road traffic incidents, which was not preferred by advocacy groups. Instead, there was a push for using terms like "collision" or "crash." It was also pointed out that the council presumably had access to extensive data from app-based parking systems, prompting inquiries about whether this data was being utilised to inform future parking decisions. It was explained that the parking team utilised data from parking apps to inform their decisions, such as implementing surcharges during peak parking hours.

Concerns were raised about older low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) established during the pandemic. Questions arose about the plans for those main roads and the older LTNs, especially since local shops and businesses along those roads felt somewhat overlooked. Questions arose about the outcomes of the food waste bins for flats above shops trial. There were also concerns about the limited availability of dockless bike hire bays, leading to inquiries about potential plans to expand them beyond the currently designated number.

Challenges surrounding older LTNs were recognised, along with the limitations of resources available for improvement. While the transport planning teams were noted to be well-resourced compared to other boroughs, prioritising projects remained difficult. There was assurance that older LTNs would be revisited, but immediate focus would need to be on new areas for improvements.

On the topic of food waste, promises were made to provide updates regarding the trial for food waste bins in properties above shops. There was also mention of an aim for a minimum of 250 dockless bike bays across the borough, with an initial focus on areas of higher demand and the concentration of issues. Plans for additional phases of the bike scheme were also in the pipeline.

There was a suggestion that the council should focus on key priority areas requiring improvement, particularly the recycling rate, which had stagnated around 24-27%. A desire was expressed to see a detailed action plan outlining how the council intended to enhance recycling efforts between 2024 and 2026. It was highlighted that food waste recycling was a major focus, particularly among street properties, where recycling rates for food waste were significantly lower. Improving the infrastructure for recycling in estates was deemed essential, with significant investment made to address this issue. Plans were discussed to begin work on the next waste reduction and recycling plan in the following year, setting clear targets to drive up recycling rates. Understanding the challenges and behaviours affecting recycling rates, particularly in different property types, was critical.

The installation of new recycling bins in various areas was pointed out as a potential way to enhance neighbourhood appearance and reduce litter. Inquiries were made about whether there was evidence to suggest that the new bins reduced contamination rates in recycling, alongside concerns over communication regarding the bins' locations.

Regarding the extended producer responsibility (EPR) policy, it was explained that, this mandated producers of packaging to contribute financially to disposal costs, incentivising reductions in packaging. While the exact financial implications remained unclear, it was noted that the funding would support waste management efforts.

The role of a climate panel in promoting better communication strategies around recycling was reiterated, with suggestions that they could help champion recycling initiatives within the community. There was assurance that data analysis would be conducted to evaluate the impact of the new bins on recycling rates and contamination.