Agenda item

Trevor Gibson, from Opportunities Peterborough gave a presentation on Peterborough DNA, part of the Future Cities Programme.

In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         A Smart City was “the effective integration of physical, digital and human systems in the built environment to deliver a sustainable, prosperous and inclusive future for its citizens”.(BSI PAS 181)

·         “A smart city dramatically increases the pace at which it improves its sustainability and resilience by fundamentally improving how it engages society, how it applies collaborative leadership methods, how it works across disciplines and city systems, and how it uses data and integrated technologies, in order to provide better services and quality of life to those in and involved with the city (residents, businesses, visitors)”. (ISO June 2015)

·         Peterborough was the UK’s second fastest growing city. It had a population of over 188,400 people.

·         Peterborough was one of four cities which received funding from the Technology Strategy Board to develop and test ideas for how smart, future-proofed cites could work. The project was delivered by Opportunity Peterborough and Peterborough City Council. It received £3million to deliver a project over 3 years.

·         The principles of the project were to focus on innovation, sustainability and growth, to provide a catalyst to change mind-sets towards an efficient and sustainable urban future and act as an enabler to delivering the city’s vision.

·         Transparency, participation, empowerment, collaboration, engagement and openness were important.

·         A requirement of the funding was that projects should be replicable and scalable.

·         Peterborough was actively involved in national Smart City thinking and standards development and applying PAS 181 (the Smart City Framework) to systematically approach the challenge from strategy through to implementation.

·         Key Initiatives were 1) Digital Peterborough – having open data and becoming the first gigabit city with superfast broadband for businesses and residents; 2) Brainwave – a platform to facilitate immediate match-making between innovators and challenges; 3) Circular Peterborough – working demonstration projects were developed to improve resource efficiency; 4) Developing Skills for our Future through the Peterborough Graduate Scheme, bursaries and Smart Suppers in which young people pitched their solutions to city challenges and one was chosen and its development supported.

·         The Smart City Leadership Programme was developed in partnership with BSI and Urban DNA Ltd. It was built around the PAS 181 Smart City Framework. It was aimed at increasing the personal and collective knowledge of city leaders about the need for, and possibilities arising from, a smart city approach. It established the foundations to increase the pace at which cities responded to the Smart City opportunity.

·         Standards Based Assessment engaged city leadership in a simple assessment process (personal or small groups) that provided a snapshot of their city’s current state of ‘smartness’. It helped to reposition ‘standards’ in the eyes of city leaders. It directly related to the PAS 181 framework and added rapid value to the Smart City standards. The assessment approach was now included in the BSI Smart Cities Overview guide, PD8100:2015.

·         In conclusion, the smart city approach should accelerate the pace of change in addressing city challenges, framework guidance could help inform each area’s approach, there was no Smart City without Smart City leadership and engagement, collaboration and partnerships were the key starting point – Smart Cities was not just about technology or investing significant resources.

·         Peterborough was 2 ½ years into its Smart Cities work so was in the early stages of seeing benefits. It would be another 2-3 years before tangible benefits would be seen.

·         It was hoped the quality of services would increase at the same time as costs decreased.

·         It was suggested that Islington Council was already be doing Smart Cities work but might not see it as such. This work could be used as a catalyst to learn across the wider remit of the council.

·         Smart Champions in the council could help to promote Smart Cities. Leadership and support from management was critical.

·         Peterborough was going to put sensors in the homes of vulnerable people who received social care in order to monitor temperature and movement. In addition 25 weather stations were being installed in schools. The data would be connected so that when temperatures were recorded as extreme, this would trigger support where necessary. It was anticipated that this project could build partnerships in the community, improve the quality of service and result in a corresponding reduction in the cost of service.

·         There had been few problems with the installation of the super broadband other than many of the main roads being dug up. The broadband was working effectively and many businesses had relocated to where the superfast broadband was in place. The council had installed the superfast broadband in conjunction with City Fibre who had undertaken the work in a number of cities.

·         The Brainwave platform had not been used as much as expected and therefore consideration would be given to how it could be promoted.

Matthew Homer, Waste Strategy Manager, gave a presentation on Smart Cities and Recycling. In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         Smart recycling measures improved efficiency and improved service.

·         Recycling and waste sites were currently emptied on a regular weekly schedule irrespective of how full they were. Bins filled at different rates at different times of the year so a regular schedule was not always possible. Visiting a half empty bin was twice as expensive as visiting a full bin.

·         Dynamic scheduling meant emptying a bin when it needed to be emptied and finding the best route from site to site. This resulted in efficient collections, better customer service and improved monitoring.

·         A bin sensors trial was taking place. The sensors were fitted to recycling bins on one of the rounds. These measured hourly fill levels and reported back to a database. The sensors advised officers when each bin was full and also predicted when the bin would be full.

·         Commercial bins and wheelie bins were currently excluded.

·         Prison bins had been excluded pending prison security checks on the system.

·         Trial smart plans would be undertaken.

·         Potential uses for sensors were in the remaining recycling sites, communal waste bins, skips, grit bins and litter bins.

·         Big Belly bins were litter bins with inbuilt sensors. They provided fill data and alerts.

·         The Clean Islington App was a mobile app which enabled residents to easily report issues to the council. It was a good example of using mobile technology to improve services for residents. It was possible that in time this could be expanded to report issues to other services.

·         Potential opportunities were not in place yet but could include 1) the digitalisation of services e.g. digital back office systems, in cab devices for front line staff and vehicle technology (GPS tracking, bin weighing and cameras); 2) management and efficient services e.g. real time dynamic routing, GPS tracking, service productivity, resource allocation, reduced administration and health and safety implications; 3) customer and better services e.g. messaging to crews, better customer service information, more use of the web and phone app.

·         Overall, a smart recycling and refuse service would provide a more efficient and better service.

·         Opportunity Peterborough had six members in the team; three of which were part time. It was well integrated with the council.

RESOLVED:

That the evidence be noted.