Belfast City Council: Health & Environmental Services Committee Meeting - Sept 2012, Study Guides, Projects, Research of Public Health

Download Belfast City Council: Health & Environmental Services Committee Meeting - Sept 2012 and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Public Health in PDF only on Docsity! Democratic Services Section Chief Executive’s Department Belfast City Council City Hall Belfast BT1 5GS 26th September, 2012 MEETING OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMMITTEE Dear Alderman/Councillor, The above-named Committee will meet in the Lavery Room (Room G05), City Hall on Wednesday, 3rd October, 2012 at 4.30 p.m., for the transaction of the business noted below. You are requested to attend. Yours faithfully PETER McNANEY Chief Executive AGENDA: 1. Routine Matters (a) Apologies (b) Minutes (c) Declarations of Interest 2. Environmental Health (a) Nomination to the Board of Directors of Engage with Age (Pages 1 - 2) (b) Provision of Winter Warmth Packs (Pages 3 - 4) (c) Consultation Document - Public Health Framework ‘Fit and Well – Changing Lives’ (Pages 5 - 22) (d) Update on Pest Control and Sewer Baiting Service (Pages 23 - 26) (e) Welfare of Animals – Update on New Arrangements (Pages 27 - 30) Document Pack - 2 - 3. Building Control (a) Application for the Naming of a Street (Pages 31 - 32) (b) Applications for the Erection of Dual-Language Street Signs (Pages 33 - 36) (c) Proposed Enhancements to Project to Address Ruinous and Dilapidated Buildings (Pages 37 - 42) (d) Northern Ireland Building Control Annual Convention (Pages 43 - 46) (e) Pricing Policy for the Accessing of Archives/Copying of Plans (Pages 47 - 48) (f) Consultation Document - Proposed Amendments to the Energy Performance of Buildings Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2008 (Pages 49 - 72) 4. Waste Management (a) Extension of Bring Site Contracts (Pages 73 - 74) (b) Tender for the Collection and Treatment of Oil and Water Based Paints and Varnishes from the Council’s Recycling Centres (Pages 75 - 76) (c) Tender for the Collection and Recycling of Mixed Timber from Recycling Centres (Pages 77 - 78) (d) Consultation on Amending the Waste Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011 (Pages 79 - 82) (e) Loo of the Year Awards - 25th Anniversary (Pages 83 - 84) 5. Cleansing Services (a) Update on the Work of the Clean Cities Working Group (Pages 85 - 88) Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Provision of Winter Warmth Packs Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Siobhan Toland, Head of Environmental Health, ext 3281 Contact Officer: John Corkey, Environmental Health Manager, ext 3289 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 At its meeting on 5th September, the Committee noted a report on the work of the Home Safety section. Much of this work links to the Council’s focus on older people, particularly through the Older People’s All-Party Reference Group. Whilst acknowledging the valuable work of the Home Safety Unit, Members asked, specifically, for an update on the preparations for the Winter Warmth Packs. The Winter Warmth Packs initiative followed on from the very severe winter of 2010 when concerns were raised about the impact of the cold weather on the elderly in particular. As a result of this the Public Health Agency (PHA) provided a number of partner organisations, including Belfast City Council, with a small number of Winter Warmth packs in October 2011. The Council initially received a total of 50 packs from the PHA. Each pack consisted of either male or female thermal underwear, a woollen hat, a woollen scarf, woollen gloves, a fleece blanket and a pair of thermal woollen socks. The Council distributed these through the Good Morning schemes and also provided them to older vulnerable people that they assessed during Home Safety checks. Due to the small number of packs provided to the Council by the PHA, a decision was taken by the Council in December, 2011 to purchase an additional 300 packs. These were subsequently delivered to appropriate individuals using the criteria provided by the PHA and the same delivery mechanisms as before. This year, £6,000 has been made available under the Older People’s budget for at least a further 350 packs. It is planned to utilise the same criteria for distribution as before. However, we will work with councillors to ensure that referral and distribution is effective at a community level. The PHA has decided not to issue packs this year. Key Issues 2.1 2.2 Winter Warmth Packs were first made available by the PHA to councils following the severe winter of 2010. Their clear benefit, particularly to older people, resulted in the Council purchasing a further 350 packs last year which were distributed through the Good Morning schemes and Environmental Health Staff. Agenda Item 2bPage 3 2.3 £6,000 has been made available for the purchase of packs this year. It is intended to use the same delivery criteria as before to ensure that they are provided to those in genuine need of them. 3.0 Resource Implications 3.1 Each Winter Warmer pack costs the Council £17. A total of 350 packs will therefore be purchased. 4.0 Equality Implications 4.1 Subject to availability packs will be distributed to those people who meet the criteria applied by the PHA. 5.0 Recommendation 5.1 The Committee is asked to note the preparations for the purchase and distribution of Winter Warmth Packs for this winter Page 4 Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Consultation Document - Public Health Framework ‘Fit and Well – Changing Lives’ Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Siobhan Toland, Head of Environmental Health, ext 3281 Contact Officer: Valerie Brown, Environmental Health Manager, ext 3301 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Members were advised at the Committee meeting on 5th September of the proposed new ten-year public health framework for 2012-2022, ‘Fit and Well – Changing Lives’. A consultation document on the framework has been issued by the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and responses are requested by 31st October. A draft Council response is attached to this report. The framework is designed to be strategic and to provide direction for policies and actions to improve the health and wellbeing of the people of Northern Ireland. It builds on the aims of the previous strategy, Investing for Health. The proposed policy aims for the new strategic framework include:
giving every child the best start
enabling all children and young people to develop the skills and capacity to reach their full potential and have control over their lives
enabling young adults to grow, manage change and maximise their potential
enabling working age adults to have a full and satisfying life and social wellbeing
enabling people in later years to have a satisfying and active life
promoting healthy safe, sustainable places and thriving communities
ensuring health is a consideration in the development of public policies. The policy aims relate to a ‘life course’ approach, where action to reduce health inequalities starts before birth and follows through the life of the child into adulthood and old age. There are five life stages in total and two underlying themes. The framework encourages interventions to achieve outcomes to meet specific needs of each life stage and to assist transition between them. Three long term outcomes over the 10 year period are:
Securing safe and supportive environments
Seeking to maximise potential
Promoting good physical and mental health and wellbeing Agenda Item 2cPage 5
The framework currently lacks detail on accountability mechanisms and performance measurement although it refers to establishing data and research groups to take forward work on the development of high level indicators. The Council has asked to be informed of the proposed indicators as they are being developed.
In terms of governance and implementation arrangements, it is unclear whether what is being proposed in the framework is significantly different from what has gone before, for example the Ministerial Group on Public Health set up under the previous strategy was not always effective at connecting cross Departmental policy or in linking strategic and local agendas. The Council response proposes that there should be further discussion around the implementation and governance arrangements in order to assure connectivity, ownership and clear accountability in delivering outcomes.
The framework should also consider the importance of targeted local neighbourhood approaches and community involvement.
The framework does not take enough account of the recent report from the Kings Fund on the clustering of unhealthy behaviours. Implications for the Council
This consultation document and the recent report from the Kings Fund on the Clustering of Unhealthy Behaviours emphasise the contribution which the Council can make to health inequalities. The latter report identifies that those in the lower socio- economic groups are five times more likely to engage in all four of the key behaviours leading to poor health, being smoking, excessive drinking, poor diet and lack of exercise.
The Council should take this opportunity, in light of the commitment it has given to address health inequalities, to raise the profile and actions it takes across all front line services to help communities address these issues. Resource Implications This report is an initial response to a consultation and there are no specific resource implications at this stage. Recommendation The Committee is requested to: (i) consider and agree the attached response to the proposed 10 year public health framework for Northern Ireland; and (ii) agree that a further report is brought back to the Committee outlining how the Council can strengthen investment in health and wellbeing as part of the Investment Programme. Decision Tracking Democratic services will submit response to the Department of Health and Social Services and Public Safety before 31st October, advising that it is subject to ratification by the Council at its meeting on 1st November. Document Attached Draft Council response Page 8 To:Health Development Policy Branch Department of Health, Social Services & Public Safety Room C.4.22 Castle Buildings Stormont Estate BELFAST BT4 3SQ Tel: 028 90522059 E-mail: fitandwellconsultation@dhsspsni.gov.uk A Response to the Consultation on Fit and Well – Changing Lives (A 10 Year Public Health Strategic Framework) Belfast City Council Page 9 Belfast City Council contact: I am responding: as an individual on behalf of an organisation Name: Valerie Brown Job Title: Environmental Health Manager Organisation: Belfast City Council Address: The Cecil Ward Building, 4-10 Linenhall Street, Belfast, BT2BP Tel: 02890 270668 M: 07713684702 Email: brownv@belfastcity.gov.uk Y Page 10 important to ensure that listing key partners against the short term options does not exclude organisations, for example the way in which the information is presented makes the role of local government and the community and voluntary sectors in delivering the outcomes unclear. It might be better to present ‘key partners’ as ‘Lead Government Departments’. In terms of the role of local government in contributing to the long term outcomes it is worth noting that the localism agenda is currently a dominant theme of National Government. Taking this into account and also the ongoing reorganisation of local government in Northern Ireland, it is suggested that the current role and indeed the future role of local government be more explicitly reflected in chapter 7 of the framework. The Council would be interested to know how the outcomes will be measured and would suggest, given the detail and operational nature of the short term outcomes, that where possible specific baseline data and data sources be identified in the framework. Pre-Birth & Early Years Lifestage (page 65) The Council considers that many of the key issues impacting on health at the early years life stage, including relationships with parents, quality child care, maternal smoking / alcohol consumption, nutrition, poverty and educational attainment are reflected in the short term outcomes. However outcome 1 (11) relating to poverty and the Social Change Delivery Framework could perhaps be expanded to consider fuel poverty’, particularly given the link between a cold environment and infant brain development. Outcome 1 (12) could be reworded to identify the change or benefits resulting from the Neighbourhood Renewal Investment Fund. Children & Young People Lifestage (page 72) The Council supports the long term outcomes but would suggest that greater emphasis on reducing teenage pregnancy rates and reducing smoking should be included in the short term outcomes (outcome 1.3 referrers to underage sales of alcohol but not tobacco products even though there is a significant investment by PHA and local councils in this area of work). Under this life stage there are a number of short term outcomes that could be reworded to make measuring progress against them easier, for example outcome 3 (1) could read ‘improved emotional health and wellbeing in pupils achieved by implementation of the Pupils’ Emotional Health and Wellbeing Programme across the primary and post primary sectors’. Other similar outcomes are, outcome 2 (3, 4, 6 and 7) and outcome 3 (1, 2, 12, 15, 16, 17 and 18) The Council would also highlight the contribution local councils and Belfast City Council in particular makes to delivering a number of the short term outcomes, in particular outcome 1 (2), outcome 3 96 and 11) Question 5: Do you wish to make any comments on the aims and outcomes for the Pre-birth and Early Years lifestage? Are there any gaps and do you have evidence to support your view? Question 6: Do you wish to make any comments on the aims and outcomes for the Children and Young People lifestage? Are there any gaps and do you have evidence to support your view? Page 13 The Council’s Parks and Leisure Department currently provides a range of resources, targeted services, programmes and facilities which provide opportunities to improve children and young people’s health and wellbeing. We currently provide a range of assets across the city including: • 10 leisure centres across the city • 48 parks and open spaces • 74 playgrounds • Outdoor fitness gyms • 120 sports pitches • 12 bowling pavilions • 1 golf course • Belfast Zoological Gardens • 1 Adventure playground There are support services in the Parks and Leisure Department to help develop and deliver opportunities for improving the health and wellbeing of children and young people. These include staff teams at each of the leisure centres, a participation manager and officers, outdoor leisure, community and outreach managers, an active living and open spaces unit and the Active Belfast co-ordinator. The Parks and Leisure Department also delivers a range of focused programmes and activities specifically for children and young people including: • Healthwise scheme; • FRESH programme; • Our involvement with bike club offering participant opportunities in cycling across BCC catchment area • Active communities – current participation level is 80% younger people • Healthy families: • Playground refurbishment programme • ‘Make a Splash’ swimming lesson programme • Summer schemes • Teenage Kicks programme • Try it sports days/ Olympic events • Schools cross country events • Provision of kids gyms • Midnight soccer programmes • Bridges urban sports park Belfast Strategic Partnership Recently the Belfast Strategic Partnership (BSP) was established. It represents a long term commitment from senior decision makers and influencers from the statutory, community and voluntary, and private sectors and local elected representatives in the city. Its purpose is to address the life inequalities that impact on Belfast and this will include agreeing effective interventions which address key priority areas, ensuring that public money is used to best effect and influencing policy makers to focus on relevant issues and invest in the correct areas. One of the BSP’s key areas of work which the Council is leading on is Active Belfast. Active Belfast aims to promote healthy living and increase physical activity. The Council is working with partners to set up a range of activities to encourage a healthier lifestyle. These fall under 3 categories: • active living (growing communities and community gardening, fresh programme) • active leisure (outdoor gyms) Page 14 • sport (active communities programme) The concept of BSP and the Active Belfast model represents a potential local delivery mechanism for achieving the outcomes identified in this framework and the Council welcomes further discussion on the role of local government in its implementation. Young Adult Lifestage (page 80) The Council supports the long term outcomes but would suggest that greater emphasis on reducing teenage pregnancy rates and assistance with travel for those seeking employment are included in short term outcomes. It is recommended the short term outcomes under this life stage are reviewed and presented so as to enable progress against them to be measured. Some of them are very general and wide ranging, in particular outcome 2 (4) and 3 (14). Another example is outcome 1 (6), which could be changed to ‘a reduction in the number of young people offending as a result of being diverted through PSCPs’; and outcome 1 (7) ‘a reduction in the number of young that have been in custody reoffending’ It is suggested that outcome 1 (12) is long rather than short term. Again the Council would like to take this opportunity to highlight the contribution local councils and Belfast City Council in particular makes to delivering a number of the short term outcomes under this life stage, in particular: Outcome 3.6: Reduction in the % of young adults who are overweight or obese Outcome 3.7: Increased % of this age group meeting the CMO physical Activity guidelines Outcome 3.8: Increased number of young people and adults with learning disabilities participating in sport and recreation and leisure activities Outcome 3.9: Increased numbers of young people who are members of at least one sports club Belfast City Council’s Parks and Leisure Department works in partnership with government departments for example PHA, DCAL and DHSSPS in delivering a wide range of activities and programmes many of which are targeted to increase participation from under-represented groups including females and people with a disability. These programmes include Active Communities, health and well-being programmes such as Healthy families, a cardiac rehabilitation programme, Activate, try it schemes and activities such as summer schemes. The Parks and Leisure Department provides a wide range of accessible facilities across the city including leisure centres, parks, outdoor pitches and specialist facilities such as the Mary Peters Track and Bridges Urban Sports Park. In relation to outcome 3 (9), the Council delivers ‘Coach-mark’ and ‘Club-mark’ schemes. We also investment in high quality facilities such as the five new 3G pitches, the upgrade of the Mary Peters Track and the development of the Bridges Urban Sports Park. Working Age Adult Lifestage (page 88) Question 7: Do you wish to make any comments on the aims and outcomes for the Young Adults lifestage? Are there any gaps and do you have evidence to support your view? Question 8: Do you wish to make any comments on the aims and outcomes for the Working Age Adults lifestage? Are there any gaps and do you have evidence to support your view? Page 15 regional issues. In addition, the Kings Fund report on the Clustering of Unhealthy Behaviours should be taken into consideration. The need for collaboration across government and within and across other sectors is clear if we are to be successful over the next ten years in addressing the significant health inequalities that currently exist. However identifying areas for collaborative working will not change the way we do things. It is important that this framework is crafted so as to both enable and drive the cultural change that is needed for us to work together to do things differently. Identifying key areas is a starting point in order to maximise the impact of regional resources but this will only happen if effectively connected into local community and area based agendas. Other areas for collaboration, which reflect the wider determinants of health, could include supporting people, building community capacity, creating employment opportunities and planning environments. There is a need for clarity around the collaboration required at local government level to make the framework work. Chapter 9 – Implementation and Governance (page 129) The Council is concerned that local government is not seen as a key delivery agent throughout the entire document to ensure implementation at a local level. In particular, the role of local government as a ‘key partner’ in delivering the outcomes in chapter 7 of the framework is not explicit and this detracts to some extent from the emphasis on collaborative working and the importance of the framework in connecting the strategic, regional and local agendas in tackling health inequalities. Government Departments need to appreciate the key role that councils play at a local level in achieving outcomes through services such as parks, leisure, community development and through the impact of local regeneration programmes. The localism agenda, which is currently a dominant theme of National Government, is weak within the framework and could be strengthened particularly in relation to delivering the outcomes under the various life stages and underpinning themes. It should be noted that, in England, many public health functions are being returned to local government. The Council does not disagree with the proposed governance arrangements but recognises that it is the connection between the strategic, regional and local levels that will be the key to effective implementation; and it is unclear how what is being proposed is significantly different from what has gone before. This is a cause for concern given the potential to overload the system at a strategic level and create a position where the framework is competing with rather than complementing or enabling other cross departmental strategies. The Public Health Agency does have the potential to improve connectivity and it is essential that it is sufficiently resourced and enabled to drive forward the implementation of the framework and effectively respond to the challenges and opportunities presented by current and emerging Question 13: Do you agree with the proposed implementation and governance arrangements – - at strategic level - at regional level - at local level? If not, what alternatives would you suggest and why? Page 18 agendas, at all levels, i.e. strategic, regional and local. Obviously the establishment of the police and community safety partnerships, local area working, the review of public administration and community planning are significant agendas for local government; they are also agendas which have the potential to support the implementation of the framework. The Council considers that there should be further discussion around the implementation and governance arrangements in order to assure connectivity, ownership and clear accountability in delivering outcomes. Funding (page 130) European funding streams should be considered for certain pilot projects with the potential to draw in more substantial or mainstream investment in the future. Monitoring Evaluation & Research (page 131) The Council considers that there should be a robust section dedicated to how the framework will be monitored and reviewed. It is vital that a robust performance measurement framework is developed at the outset (containing a balance of input, output and outcome measures). Section 9.22 suggests that data and research groups have been established to take forward the work on the development of high level indicators; the Council would welcome the opportunity to be consulted on the proposed indicators as they are being developed. Summary of Belfast City Council’s Response The proposed framework is very detailed and all encompassing and it highlights the importance of coordination at regional level and also between regional and local levels in addressing public health issues. There is a strong emphasis on partnership working, including working with local government and across sectors, and in influencing the incorporation of health and health equity across government policy. Key Strengths • The framework provides an important starting point to consider what can be learned from the work of Investing for Health and there is a clear ambition within it to continue to work to address the persistent factors which contribute to health inequalities. There is also an ambition within the framework to connect the strategic, regional and local levels in working better together to maximise impact and improve health and wellbeing. • The framework is outcome and evidenced based and cuts across the life course of individuals. • It is seeking synergy with other relevant strategies, policies and programmes on a cross Departmental basis. • The strategy recognises the growing importance of an asset approach; i.e. building on what communities have rather than basing interventions on what they don’t have. • The strategic priorities identified in the framework are very relevant to the citizens of Belfast, particularly ‘early years’ given the evidence which suggests that a large part of the Question 14: In addition, are there other potential sources of funding we should be pursuing? Question 15: Do you agree with the proposed actions for the Data and Research groups? If not, what alternatives would you suggest and why? Page 19 pattern for a person’s future adult life is set by age 3; and also the fact that research has shown that preventative strategies and early intervention are cost effective and that resources invested in early years will result in proportionately greater benefits. • The Council is a strong advocate of the concept of health and health equity in all policies; a concept which is reflected in the public health framework as one of the underpinning themes. • The priority areas proposed for collaborative working in the framework reflect the commitments in the three main areas of the Council’s Investment Programme 2012-2015; physical investment, investment in economic growth and investment under the theme of supporting people, communities and neighbourhoods. In particular, the priority areas under the Belfast Strategic Partnership framework for action are reflected in several of the areas identified in the public health framework; in particular, addressing lifelong learning related issues, focusing on early years and early interventions, and regenerating living places and healthy spaces. The themes of poverty, building community capacity and ‘Active Belfast’ also tie in. The two areas specifically identified in Belfast not included in the priority areas in this framework are addressing mental health and emotional wellbeing and addressing alcohol and drug related health issues; both significant regional issues. These have been highlighted in the Council’s response. Areas requiring clarification or further discussion • The Council is concerned that local government is not seen as a key delivery agent throughout the entire document to ensure implementation at a local level. In particular, the role of local government as a ‘key partner’ in delivering the outcomes in chapter 7 of the framework is not explicit and this detracts to some extent from the emphasis on collaborative working and the importance of the framework in connecting the strategic, regional and local agendas in tackling health inequalities. Government Departments need to appreciate the key role that councils play at a local level in achieving outcomes through services such as parks, leisure, community development and through the impact of local regeneration programmes. • Chapter 7 of the framework is slightly confusing because of the extensive number of short term outcomes, some of which are repeated at different life stages and some of which are more like actions or work streams. It is suggested in the Council response that the short term outcomes are rationalised, focused and worded to fit in with the definition of an outcome as stated in the framework. This is needed for clarity. • The localism agenda, which is currently a dominant theme of National Government, is weak within the framework and could be strengthened particularly in relation to delivering the outcomes under the various life stages and underpinning themes. It should be noted that, in England, many public health functions are being returned to local government. • The Council response highlights that while identifying priority areas for collaboration is useful in potentially maximising the impact of regional resources, it will not actually change the way we do things. It is important therefore that the public health framework is crafted so as to both enable and drive the cultural change that is required for government, organisations and sectors to work together to do things differently in reducing the significant health inequalities that exist. • The framework currently lacks detail on accountability mechanisms and performance measurement although it referrers to establishing data and research groups to take forward work on the development of high level indicators. The Council has asked to be informed of the proposed indicators as they are being developed. • In terms of governance and implementation arrangements it is unclear whether what is being proposed in the framework is significantly different from what has gone before, for example the Ministerial Group on Public Health set up under the previous strategy was not always effective at connecting cross Departmental policy or in linking strategic and local agendas. The Council response proposes that there should be further discussion around the Page 20 Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Update on Pest Control and Sewer Baiting Service Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Siobhan Toland, Head of Environmental Health, ext 3281 Contact Officer: John Corkey, Environmental Health Manager, ext 3289 1.0 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 The Council’s Pest Control Section provides a comprehensive pest control service to both domestic and commercial premises. The treatment of public health pests, such as rats and mice, is provided free of charge to all domestic premises. There is a charge, however, for the treatment of commercial premises and for the treatment of non-public health pests, such as wasps, in domestic premises, although there is no charge for people aged over 60 or those who are on certain benefits. The Council’s sewer baiting team also forms part of the Pest Control section and, until December 2011, it was primarily funded by NI Water. Although rats can inhabit a variety of habitats, in the urban environment they are particularly well suited to life in the sewers. Therefore, targeting rats by baiting the sewers not only focuses on an important harbourage source but also allows effective treatments to be carried out without unnecessary danger to other animals such as wildlife or domestic pets. The Council has acknowledged that sewer baiting is an important service in controlling the rat population in the city and directly assists the pest control service in protecting public health. Despite this however NIW has reduced the budget for this service and it will be completely phased out by the end of November, 2013. In effect, next year there will only be an NIW budget of £6,750 which will be insufficient to support any meaningful programme. At its meeting of 8th February 2012, the Committee agreed that Legal Services “...pursue the issue of NI Water’s statutory obligations under the Rats and Mice (Destruction) Act 1919 and put them on notice of this course of action...” In order to establish an evidential basis on which to challenge the position adopted by NIW, Legal Services directed that monitoring be undertaken to establish that the absence of, or reduction, in baiting had an adverse impact and further research to demonstrate that the practice represented an effective and reasonably practicable method to control rats. On 3rd August, 2012, the Council’s Legal Services Manager, having considered the evidence and material referred to in the preceding paragraph, wrote to the Chairman of the Board of Agenda Item 2dPage 23 1.8 1.9 NI Water (a copy is attached). He indicated that NI Water seemed unaware of its duty under the Rats and Mice (Destruction) Act 1919 and that the Council was satisfied that the phasing out of sewer baiting would have a detrimental impact on the rat population and consequently upon the quality of life of those living, working in or visiting the city. He asked that the Board reconsiders its decision to reduce and phase out sewer baiting otherwise the Council may commence a more formal process by the service of a notice. A response was received on 28th August 2012 from NI Water’s Senior Lawyer, on behalf of the Board Chairman (a copy is attached), who advised that NI Water would be carrying out a full review and assessment of the sewer baiting service and that the Council’s letter was therefore premature. The letter also claimed that NI Water was not in breach of the Rats and Mice Destruction Act as they had made funding available for a reactive service. Despite NIW’s intention to review the sewer baiting service Mr Hogan has already stated in previous correspondence that “...Notwithstanding the outcome of such a review we intend to phase out our funding...”. 2.0 Key Issues 2.1 2.2 The Legal Services Manager is currently reviewing the NIW response with counsel with a view to invoking the statutory process to compel NIW to meet its legal obligations. However, pending a satisfactory resolution of this matter, the Council will only be able to provide a minimal and diminishing service after March 2013. NIW funding for next year will not be sufficient to sustain the same level of service and, unless NIW alters its position, funding will not be available after November, 2013. This position may require review following the outcome of any legal proceedings and/or a decision by NIW as to how it will discharge its legal duty. The Head of Environmental Health will, in light of the decision on legal proceedings, develop options for the future of the service and will present these to Committee in due course. 3.0 Resource Implications 3.1 A further report will be brought to Committee in due course. There are potential HR implications should a decision be made not to provide any baiting service at all. 4.0 Equality Implications 4.1 None 5.0 Recommendation 5.1 The Committee is requested to note the report and that a further report will be brought to Committee setting out options for future service delivery taking account of any developments in legal proceedings. Documents Attached • Letter to Chairman of the Board of NI Water • Response from NI Water Page 24 Page 25 Our Ref 402-002260-0-JW 3rd August 2012 Mr Sean Hogan Board Chairman Westland House Old Westland Road BELFAST BT14 6TE Dear Mr Hogan Re: Rats & Mice (Destruction) Act 1919 Sewers within Belfast City Council Area | refer to the above matter and NIW’s decision to reduce and ultimately phase out baiting as a means of controlling rats inhabiting sewers. Al the time this decision was taken the Council expressed its disappointment and it’s apprehension of the detrimental impact this may have. NIW seemed unaware of its duty under the Rats & Mice (Destruction) Act 1919, citing that its only duty was to ensure effectual drainage. This aporoach falls into error as it ignores a range of duties that might arise as a result of other legislation of which the obligation to take reasonably practicable steps for the destruction of rats and mice is one. NIW has put forward the case that the absence of sewer baiting in other towns and-cities is a justification for the approach of phasing this activity out in Belfast. This in the Council's view has no bearing on the applicable legal test and the Council is satisfied that the phasing out of sewer baiting has had and will have a detrimental impact on the rat population and consequently upon the quality of life of those living, working in or visiting the city. Moreover as a public utility company previously undertaking this activity, one can only reasonably assume that some assessment of the need for this activity was carried out prior to expenditure being incurred. | have been instructed by the Council to seek to ensure that NIW fulfils its legal duty. in order to avoid two public bodies becoming embroiled in legal proceedings, | write to encourage. informal resolution of matters and ask that you reconsider your decision to reduce and phase out sewer baiting as a means of con:rolling rats. The Council may commence a more formal process by the service of a notice requiring NIW to take the necessary steps but awaits your response to this correspondence, in the hope that this will not prove necessary. Yours sincerely John Walsh Legal Services Manager JW/EOG  1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 on-duty Animal Welfare Officer. An on-call rota is agreed on an annual basis to ensure cover for each week of the year. Belfast’s Legal Services Department has been engaged to provide legal advice and undertake formal legal proceedings on behalf of all the District Councils, including Belfast. Regional policies and procedures and systems of work, including web based data recording and management, have been put in place with a review period factored in early next year to analyse how the new responsibilities in regard to animal welfare provision are working. Regionally, during the first quarter of 2012/2013, a total of 1407 requests for service were received of which 318 were in Belfast. Regionally, 60 % of the total requests for service related to dogs, 20% horses, 10% cats and the remainder were for other small pet animals such as rabbits and reptiles. Belfast also dealt with 3 cases involving horses. Belfast’s Animal Welfare Officer has issued 27 Improvement Notices, has seized 2 animals and has initiated 2 prosecutions. The Belfast AWO has also provided support and assistance to the other regionally based AWO’s. This includes several incidences of hoarding and multi animal seizures and issuing Improvement Notices outside BCC boundaries. The Dog Control Manager, who has line management responsibility for Animal Welfare, is seeking to agree a more comprehensive veterinary service to include the work of both Animal Welfare and the Dog Warden Service. Veterinary costs however, for animal welfare, will continue to be refundable by DARD. Key Issues 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 District Councils are responsible for the enforcement of the powers in the Welfare of Animals Act (NI) 2011 in respect of non-farmed animals. Regional management is led by Omagh District Council through a Project Board made up of representatives from the five regional council groups including Belfast. There is an operational sub group of AWO line managers who oversee day to day service provision. DARD is committed to funding the delivery of animal welfare for at least the first 3 years. The governance arrangements between the five lead councils have been agreed. A SLA has been drafted and agreed outlining their responsibilities to each other in respect of the legislation including agreement to transfer funds between the groupings to ensure that service needs are met. BCC Legal Services has been engaged to act on behalf of all District Councils Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 DARD will fund delivery of Animal Welfare in 2012-2013 up to £780,000 for the region (pro rata £158,000 for Belfast City Council). Where there are spending differences attributable to unforeseeable animal welfare issues across lead council areas a MOU provides for appropriate redistribution of spend between councils. In accordance with the agreed implementation process Belfast raised an invoice £19,909.31 for the year 2011/2012 which has been submitted to Banbridge BC for payment. An invoice for £11,933.50 costs incurred for the 1st quarter of 2012/2013 has been submitted to DARD and has been authorised for payment. Page 28 Equality Implications 4.1 None Recommendation 5.1 The Committee is requested to note the Council’s role in respect of animal welfare and, in particular, the extent of the work undertaken to date. Page 29 Page 30 This page is intentionally left blank Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Applications for the Erection of Dual Language Street Signs Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Trevor Martin, Head of Building Control, ext. 2450 Contact Officer: Stephen Hewitt, Building Control Manager, ext. 2435 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 The power for the Council to consider applications to erect a second street nameplate in a language other than English is contained in Article 11 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) (NI) Order 1995. Applications have been received to erect a second street nameplate at Farnham Street, Short Strand, Perry Court, Glen Crescent and Glen Parade showing the name of the street expressed in a language other than English. The second language is Irish. The translations were authenticated by Queens University, the approved translator for Belfast City Council. In accordance with the Council’s policy for the erection of dual language street signs, surveys of all persons appearing on the Electoral Register and tenants or owners of commercial premises for the above streets, were carried out and the following responses were received. Farnham Street Street, BT7 62 people (84%) are in favour of the erection of a second street nameplate 2 people (3%) are not in favour of the erection of a second street nameplate 1 person (1%) had no preference either way 9 people (12%) did not respond to the survey Short Strand, BT5 49 people (79%) are in favour of the erection of a second street nameplate 13 people (21%) did not respond to the survey Perry Court, BT5 8 people (73%) are in favour of the erection of a second street nameplate 3 people (27%) did not respond to the survey Agenda Item 3bPage 33 1.8 1.9 1.10 Glen Crescent, BT11 21 people (78%) are in favour of the erection of a second street nameplate 2 people (7%) are not in favour of the erection of a second street nameplate 4 People (15%) did not respond to the survey Glen Parade, BT11 27 people (84%) are in favour of the erection of a second street nameplate 1 person (3%) had no preference either way 4 people (13%) did not respond to the survey The Council’s policy on the erection of a second street nameplate requires that at least two thirds (66.6%) of the people surveyed must be in favour of the proposal to erect a second street sign in a language other than English. 2 Key Issues 2.1 To consider the following applications for dual language street signs for existing street names within the City. English Name Non-English Location Applicant Persons Name Surveyed Farnham Street Sráid Farnham Off Ormeau Rd, Mr Pat Smith 74 BT7 Short Strand An Trá Ghearr Off Bridge End, Mr Pat Smith 62 BT5 Perry Court Cúirt Perry Off Madrid Street, Mr Pat Smith 11 BT5 Glen Crescent Corrán an Off Falls Road, Councillor 27 Ghleanna BT11 Mac Giolla Mhín Glen Parade Paráid an Off Falls Road, Councillor 32 Ghleanna BT11 Mac Giolla Mhín 3 Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 There is a cost of approximately £750 covering the cost of the manufacturing and erection of these dual language street signs. The cost for these street signs has been allowed for in the current budget. There are no Human Resources or Assets and Other Implications in this report. 4 Equality and Good Relations Considerations 4.1 There are no equality or good relations issues. Page 34 5 Recommendation 5.1 Since at least two thirds of the total numbers of persons surveyed in the aforementioned streets are in favour of the proposal to erect a second street nameplate in Irish, the Committee is recommended to approve the applications. 6 Decision Tracking If the decision is to refuse the applications, then a letter will be sent to the applicant within five days of the Council decision, advising them of the decision. If the decision is to grant the application, then the applicant and all relevant organisations will be advised within 14 days of the Council decision. Building Control will arrange for the dual language sign to be erected within 8 weeks. The person responsible for the actions above is Trevor Martin, Head of Building Control. Page 35 1.6 1.7 Given the detrimental impact which these properties have on neighbourhoods, there is a commitment within the Investment Programme to deal with an increased number of dilapidated and derelict buildings to support neighbourhood regeneration. Approval was granted by Committee in June of this year for the Service to undertake a survey of the city to identify and evaluate all the ruinous and dilapidated properties. 2 Key Issues 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 The Service has recently completed a survey of the city to identify all the derelict, dilapidated and ruinous properties that exist. Approximately 4000 streets were surveyed and information was collected on the properties which fell into the criteria set for the project. A total of 1500 properties (including sites and abandoned building works) were identified as potentially being in a ruinous or dilapidated condition. As enforcement may not have been applicable to all of these properties, they were individually assessed against the legislation to identify those whose we believe action could be taken on. This confirmed a total of approximately 250 properties that the Service believes are appropriate for enforcement action. The 250 properties range in various states of dilapidation and therefore need to be prioritised to determine the order in which action is taken. In order to do this we took each individual property and assessed it against a matrix (see Appendix to report). Each property was given a rating against 12 categories ranging from aesthetic condition, impact on attached properties, antisocial behaviour, arterial routes, other Council initiatives and the use of information from partnering organisations, e.g. DSD, NIFRS and PSNI. This rating has been used as an attempt to identify which properties may have a greater detrimental impact on the surrounding area so as to assist Members in determining the priority for enforcement action. An additional factor which needs to be considered is ownership of the properties in question. The failure to identify an owner may restrict the ability to serve notices. Under Article 66 of the Pollution Control (NI) Order 1978 the council’s prohibited from issuing a notice on owner unknown and this factor is being considered as part of the evaluation. In order to aid decision-making on the prioritisation of the programme of action, the evaluation of the properties will also be presented to committee in geographical form. This will include:
Location of all properties on map
Electoral wards overlay
Segmentation of individual properties against priority score
Various programme options A decision is required from Members as to the programme option the Service which should use in taking action. The Service has commissioned a legal opinion from Queens Counsel to determine the methods of recouping the money outlaid to any out works in default. That opinion has been recently been received and whilst the opinion is favourable to the Council recovering money, discussions are ongoing in relation to the methodology we employ and the development of policies we need in place. A report will be brought to Committee in due course outlining the proposed procedure for recovering costs in relation to dangerous, ruinous or dilapidated properties. It should also be noted that the Minister for the Department of the Environment, Alex Attwood MLA has been taking a keen interest in this project and has asked that the results of the project, including any difficulties encountered in dealing with buildings, be passed to him in order that he review the current legislation in this area. Page 38 3 Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 3.3 Financial The Service currently has £70K of the budget allocated to tackle properties to the end of the current financial year and anticipates £100K for 2013-2014 which will be built into the revenue estimates. Human Resources The Service is not requesting additional support at this time but would ask committee to note that in delivering this project through the reallocation of existing staff other services may not be delivered as we would wish. In addition it should be noted that taking action on these properties will also have resource implications on Legal Services as some cases will require court action and discussions have taken place with Legal Services to this effect. Asset and Other Implications None. 4 Equality and Good Relations Considerations 4.1 None. 5 Recommendation 5.1 The Committee is requested to agree a programme by which the Building Control Service take action on the 250 properties identified. 6 Decision Tracking The Head of Building Control will be responsible for any actions decided at Committee. 7 Documents Attached None. Page 39 Page 40 This page is intentionally left blank Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Service Committee. Subject: Northern Ireland Building Control Annual Convention Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Suzanne Wylie, Director of Health and Environmental Services, ext 3260 Contact Officer: Trevor Martin, Head of Building Control Service, ext 2450 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 The Northern Ireland Group Chief Building Control Officers’ Committee and Building Control Northern Ireland, of which Belfast are members, arranges an annual convention each year for Elected Members, building control surveryors, architects and other construction professionals. The convention is the highlight of the profession’s year and is always well attended. The conference attracts upwards of 120 delegates, a great proportion of which are elected members from other authorities. This year’s convention, organised by the South Eastern Group of Councils, is to be held in the Slieve Donard Hotel in Newcastle on 15th and 16th November. The theme is “Developing Northern Ireland” and there is a wide range of speakers from the United Kingdom. The first day presenters will be speaking on issues such as the economic outlook, investors’ requirements, future of planning service and case studies from Cardiff City Council on the key partnerships required to assist regeneration. The second day of the programme will involve Northern Ireland key professionals and focus on what measures are required to assist central government, councils and the wider industry in encouraging development. A copy of the draft programme is attached.. The convention has always achieved a high level of attendance and input from Elected Members and so the programme deliberately steers away from the purely technical issues into areas of greater strategic significance for local authorities. 2 Resource Implications 2.1 Financial The costs of the Convention have been kept the same as previous years and are:
Full Conference Rate £265.00 (all events including conference dinner).
Daily Delegate Rate £80.00
Convention Dinner £45.00 The Service has already included costs in its current revenue budget. Agenda Item 3dPage 43 2.2 Human Resources There are no additional resource requirements apart from time off for officers attending convention. 3 Recommendation 3.1 It is recommended that the Committee grant authority for the Chairman, the Deputy Chairman, the Director of Health and Environmental Services and the Head of Building Control (or their nominees) to attend the event and agrees to authorise the payment of the conference fees, together with the appropriate travelling expenses. Document Attached Conference programme. Page 44 B o o ki n g F o rm P a y m e n t O p ti o n s I e n cl o se a c h e q u e f o r £ P le a se i n vo ic e m e P le a se d e b it m y V is a / M a st e rc a rd / A m e x C a rd n u m b e r N a m e o f ca rd h o ld e r S ig n a tu re E xp ir y d a te S e cu ri ty c o d e co m p a n y a d d re ss C a n ce ll a ti o n s / S u b st it u ti o n s Fo r th o se u n a b le t o a tt e n d , a s u b st it u te d e le g a te m a y b e se n t in t h e ir p la ce f o r n o a d d it io n a l ch a rg e . A lt e rn a ti v e ly a re fu n d w il l b e g iv e n f o r ca n ce ll a ti o n s re ce iv e d i n w ri ti n g , b y p o st o r e m ai l u p t o 1 4 d a y s p ri o r to t h e c o n v e n ti o n . R e g re tt a b ly n o r e fu n d s ca n b e m a d e a ft e r th a t d a te . A ck n o w le d g e m e n t o f R e g is tr a ti o n fo ll o w in g r e g is tr a ti o n d e ta il s. If y o u h av e n o t re ce iv e d y o u r a ck n o w le d g e m e n t 7 d a y s p ri o r to t h e d a te o f th e c o n v e n ti o n p le as e c o n ta ct s e g ro u p .b c@ d o w n d c. g o v. u k H o w t o R e g is te r B y e m a il se g ro u p .b c@ d o w n d c. g o v. u k B y w e b w w w .d o w n d c. g o v. u k B y p o st D o w n D is tr ic t C o u n ci l D o w n sh ir e C iv ic C e n tr e D o w n sh ir e E st a te A rd g la ss R o a d D o w n p a tr ic k B T3 0 6 R A B y t e le p h o n e 0 2 8 4 4 6 1 0 8 2 7 B y F a x 0 2 8 4 4 6 1 0 8 0 1 O rg a n is e d b y S o u th E a st e rn G ro u p B u il d in g C o n tr o l o n b e h a lf o f th e B u il d in g C o n tr o l G ro u p C o m m it te e s in N o rt h e rn I re la n d . V e n u e S li e ve D o n a rd R e so rt & S p a , N e w ca st le , C o D o w n D a te 1 5 & 1 6 N o ve m b e r 2 0 1 2 Th e N o rt h e rn I re la n d c o n st ru ct io n i n d u st ry g re w s te a d il y o v e r m a n y y e a rs u n ti l th e p e a k a ct iv it y o f 2 0 0 7 , h o w e v e r, th e g lo b a l d o w n tu rn h a s h a d a m a jo r im p a ct o n t h e s e ct o r re su lt in g i n a n u n p re ce d e n te d s lo w d o w n w it h c o rr e sp o n d in g j o b l o ss e s. L o ca l G o v e rn m e n t re co g n is e t h e e co n o m ic i m p a ct o f co n st ru ct io n i s fa r re a ch in g a cr o ss t h e w id e r N o rt h e rn I re la n d e co n o m y a s e a ch £ 1 i n v e st e d i n c o n st ru ct io n g e n e ra te s £ 2 .8 4 sp e n d * S ti m u la ti n g g ro w th a n d p ro sp e ri ty i n t h e c o n st ru ct io n i n d u st ry re q u ir e s a c o -o rd in a te d a p p ro a ch , f ro m a ll s ta ke h o ld e rs . Th e R e v ie w o f P u b li c A d m in is tr a ti o n r e p re se n ts a u n iq u e o p p o rt u n it y t o c re a te a n i m p ro v e d d e li v e ry s y st e m f o r d e v e lo p m e n t in N o rt h e rn I re la n d . Th e 2 0 1 2 B u il d in g C o n tr o l G ro u p C o m m it te e C o n v e n ti o n w il l b ri n g t o g e th e r re p re se n ta ti v e s fr o m t h e P la n n in g S e rv ic e , B u il d in g C o n tr o l, E co n o m ic D e v e lo p m e n t a n d I n d u st ry . T h e cu rr e n t d e li v e ry m o d e ls o f e a ch o f th e s e ct o rs w il l b e r e v ie w e d o p p o rt u n it ie s e xi st t o e n h a n ce s e rv ic e d e li v e ry . I t w il l e xp lo re o p p o rt u n it ie s fo r ch a n g e a n d c o n si d e r h o w w e c a n d e v e lo p a st ra te g y w h ic h w il l cr e a te t h e e n v ir o n m e n t th a t n u rt u re s a n d p ro m o te s su st a in a b le d e v e lo p m e n t in N o rt h e rn I re la n d . M a ri e W a rd M R IC S S o u th E a st e rn G ro u p B u il d in g C o n tr o l * C o n st ru ct io n I n d u st ry T ra in in g B o a rd ‘Bangor Aurora’ courtesy of North Down Borough Council Page 45 2.2 2.3 These costs are slightly above the market figure as we do not wish to take business from the local companies but merely provide a facility for customers if required. The £10.00 administration charge for the arrangement fee for the copying of plans will no longer be charged. If agreed, then Building Control will no longer forward any drawings to a local printer to print or photocopy drawings or documents. A fee of about £150 was paid last year for this service. 3 Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 3.3 Financial Adopting the charging proposals will generate revenue income of approximately £230.00 for the Service. Human Resources None. Asset and Other Implications None. 4 Equality Implications 4.1 There are no equality or good relations issues. 5 Recommendation 5.1 The Committee is requested to approve the pricing policy proposals for the copying of plans and search fees. 6 Decision Tracking The person responsible for any actions arising from this report is Trevor Martin, Head of Building Control. Page 48 Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Consultation Document - Proposed Amendments to the Energy Performance of Buildings Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2008 Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Trevor Martin, Head of Building Control, ext. 2450 Contact Officer: Stephen Hewitt, Building Control Manager, ext. 2435 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Members will recall that the duty for enforcing The Energy Performance of Buildings (Certificates and Inspections) Regulations (NI) 2008 (as amended) (the EPB Regulations) has been the responsibility of district councils since 3rd December, 2009. The EPB Regulations came about as a result of an European Union Directive requiring all newly constructed buildings, any properties marketed for sale or rent and properties with air-conditioning systems to have an appropriate energy certificate. An energy certificate is produced after an audit is carried out which identifies the energy rating and a CO2 emissions rating of a building. The certificate is in the form of two coloured A-G graphs similar to those which are displayed on white goods such as washing machines. Acting on the recommendations supplied with the energy certificate will improve energy efficiency and potentially reduce utility costs. The current EPB Regulations are to be amended in order to implement the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive 2010/21/EU (EPBD2) in line with European requirements. The proposed amendments are to become operational on 9th January, 2013 with a further amendment scheduled to become operational in 2015. The amendments to the Regulations are aimed at delivering further reductions in energy consumption in the built environment and also avoiding any potential European infraction proceedings and fines. Energy certificates can be used as a tool to identify properties with low energy ratings such as those which the Affordable Warmth initiative aims to address. EPB Regulations also assist in the Government’s drive to reduce Carbon emissions outlined in the Carbon Reduction Commitment. The proposed amendments have been released by the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) for public consultation with a closing date for the receipt of responses being 12 October 2012. The consultation document, which outline fully the proposed new requirements and amendments, are available at www.epb.dfpni.gov.uk. Agenda Item 3fPage 49 2 Key Issues 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 The main proposals contained within the consultation document on EPBD2 relate to: Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs)
anyone, including estate agents, marketing a property for sale or rent must display the energy rating of the property on the A-G scale (buildings awarded an A rating being the most efficient) on all commercial media, such as property brochures and advertisements.
non-domestic properties (for example offices, supermarkets, retail and leisure premises) with a floor area greater than 500m² that are frequently visited by the public and are being marketed for sale or rent, or have been recently built will require the EPC to be displayed. Display Energy Certificates (DECs):
publicly-funded buildings that are frequently visited by the public with a floor area greater than 500m² will now need to have and display a DEC (previous threshold was 1000m²). This will further reduce in July 2015 to include buildings with a floor area greater than 250 m². Air Conditioning Inspection Reports:
properties which have air-conditioning systems (output more than 12kW) will have to lodge their energy inspection report onto Landmark, the National EPB register. Persons found to be in breach of the EPB Regulations will be subject to enforcement action which may result in a fixed penalty fine. The proposed amendments will increase the scope of our enforcement duties under the regulations. The introduction of the EPB Regulations in 2009 brought funding from the DFP to assist the administration of the legislation across Northern Ireland. This was concentrated in a dedicated team which was set up in Belfast to promote and raise awareness about the Regulations and to provide advice and support to all 26 Councils. It is uncertain if the current funding from DFP for this team will continue at all after this financial year. Whilst we will endeavour to enforce the legislation through mainstreaming it into existing processes the lack of sufficient additional resources will make it increasingly difficult to administer this function. In the current financial climate the pressures on both the domestic and non-domestic property markets suggest there is potential for some negative media impact concerning these changes. In order to counter this, extensive awareness-raising is being carried out to advise those currently marketing properties of the proposed amendments. A draft response, incorporating the views of other Services directly involved with EPB regulations, primarily those of Facilities Management in the Property and Projects Department, is attached to this report. 3 Resource Implications 3.1 Financial There are no additional resources sought therefore no Financial implications. Page 50 1 Energy Performance of Buildings (Certificates and Inspections) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2008 Consultation Proposals Response Form for Consultees Closing date for the receipt of responses is 4:00pm on Friday 12 October 2012 20 July 2012 Page 53 2 Energy Performance of Buildings (Certificates and Inspections) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2008 Consultation Proposals RESPONSE FORM FOR CONSULTEES The Department will consider all responses to this consultation received on or before the closing date for receipt of responses which is Friday 12 October 2012 @ 4:00 pm. Submissions made after this date will not be considered. We would be grateful if you would use e-mail to return the completed Response Form to: noeleen.o’neill@dfpni.gov.uk However it may be printed and posted, or faxed to – Noeleen O’Neill Consultation Co-ordinator Department of Finance and Personnel Building Standards Branch Level 5, Causeway Exchange 1-7 Bedford Street Belfast BT2 7 EG Fax: (028) 9082 3282 Page 54 3 COMPLETION OF THE RESPONSE FORM Please refer to the package of Consultation Documents which outline fully the proposed new requirements and amendments, and to the Regulatory Impact Assessment which accompany this Response Form. These documents are available at – www.epb.dfpni.gov.uk Consultees are encouraged to respond on any aspects of the proposals. However, the Department would particularly welcome answers to and comments on the questions on this Form. Click on the box (or insert an “x”) beside “Yes”, “No”, or “No view” as appropriate. It is not essential to give an answer to every question. The last question is completely open to enable consultees to make suggestions or observations that do not fit into the preceding questions. Please make any comments you might have in the box provided. If you disagree with any of the proposals the Department would be interested to know why you disagree. Page 55 6 QUESTIONS Clarifying the meaning of terms in the 2008 Regulations to align with EPBD2 terms Q4.1.1. Do you agree with the proposals to amend the wording of Regulation 4(1)(a) of the 2008 Regulations in relation to places of worship to “buildings that are used as places of worship and for religious activities”? Yes No No view Comments (if any): The expansion of this remit has the potential to be misinterpreted and/ or misused. For example a dwelling could be exempt if occupied by a person practising religious activities and who uses a room in their home for worship which is not the primary use of the dwelling. The existing wording in the 2008 EPB Regulations is sufficient or alternatively consider including ‘excluding dwellings’ under the remit of the legislation. Q4.1.2. Do you agree with the proposal to define an advisory report as “a report issued by an energy assessor, after his energy assessment of the building, which contains recommendations for the cost-effective improvement of the energy performance of the building or building unit”? Yes No No view Comments (if any): It would be beneficial to define the term ‘building unit’ to avoid any potential misinterpretation. Page 58 7 Do you agree with the proposal to define a recommendation report as “a report included in the energy performance certificate that contains recommendations for the cost-effective improvement of the energy performance of the building or building unit”? Yes No No view Comments (if any): as Q 4.1.2 Extension of sampling and multiple certification techniques to include single-family dwellings Q4.2. Do you agree with the proposal to amend Regulation 8 of the 2008 Regulations to extend sampling and multiple certification to single- family dwellings? Yes No No view Comments (if any): It is a concern that when implemented this will result in generic, non- specific or inaccurate EPCs. If used with: o New Build and OCEPC - a sample dwelling will not take account of property location, orientation, exposure etc o Existing dwelling - a sample dwelling may be penalised by achieving a lower energy or carbon emission rating if it has a higher specification of for example, a highly efficient heating appliance, renewable energy, triple glazing, etc. Additionally, experience in Belfast to date would suggest that this may well lead to misuse by some energy assessors and result in a devaluing of the EPC standards. Page 59 8 All commercial media produced for a building must state the energy performance indicator from the EPC Q4.3.3. Do you agree with the proposal to add a new regulation requiring the A-G graph to be used in commercial media except where the size and type of advertisement would render this impractical in which case a combination of the letter and numeric rating must be used instead e.g. EPC A92? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Consider including the EPC 20 digit number URN and/or the full property address to avoid an incorrect graph being attached to the marketing material. Consider including a definition of ‘commercial media’ to avoid any misinterpretation. Provide clarity as to the location of the A-G graph within the brochure. Website marketing should include the full address of the property (often website marketed properties are displayed without a property number). Do you agree with the proposal to define commercial media to mean “any material produced specific to a building, on any medium, with the intention of advertising the building for sale or rent”? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Consider expanding to include ‘building unit’. Page 60 11 Comments (if any): The display of a DEC is preferable to EPC display in order to meet an effective interpretation of the EPBD2. As one of the important objectives of the Directive is to reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions, the DEC is a far more appropriate certificate to display this. The DEC illustrates an accurate account of the utility usage, regardless of property age or construction type. The DEC encourages the occupant to use the property more energy efficiently, therefore reducing CO2 emissions. By acting on the accompanying AR, potential financial savings could be made. B. Display an EPC, based on a building’s asset rating, and have a recommendation report, both of which are valid for 10 years: Comments (if any): As the EPC does not consider the operational use of the building, it does not encourage the occupant to use the property in a more energy efficient manner, therefore reducing CO2 emissions. Changes in a building’s occupancy and the annual energy usage cannot be assumed or determined in an EPC. The EPC display will provide little benefit to the public. In older properties (e.g. NIEA historic listed buildings) there may not be the possibility of achieving a good rating in comparison to that of newer build energy ratings, potentially giving misleading information. Except for recently constructed properties where the building fabric, insulation, etc. are recorded in building control inspections, the EPC for older properties may often be generalised and inaccurate. Assumptions (potentially inaccurate) regarding the property age and/or construction type produce a non-specific or less detailed EPC. While an EPC is renewed every 10 years, a DEC requires annual production with a 7 year AR renewal. If the occupant acts on the advisory report recommendations, there could be considerable annual cost savings achieved by the occupant. It may be a false economy to consider production costs of the EPC and DECs. While EPCs are required less frequently than DECs; the potential cost savings identified through the building usage on the DEC could prove financially much more beneficial. Page 63 12 Displaying an EPC in buildings over 500m2 frequently visited by the public where an EPC has been produced for the purposes of sale, rent or on construction Q4.5.1. Do you agree with the proposal to introduce a new regulation to require that where an EPC has been issued for the purposes of sale, rent or on construction for a non-domestic building with a total useful floor area over 500m2 and which is frequently visited by the public, that the EPC must be displayed in a prominent place clearly visible to the public? Yes No No view Comments (if any): While the display of an EPC has little benefit on the general public, its display may reinforce the Energy Efficiency and Carbon Reduction message. Will there be a reference to the enforcement where a breach of this regulation is found and a PCN is to be issued? There should be a clear definition of ‘frequently visited’ to avoid any misinterpretation of the regulation. It is anticipated that shopkeepers will be reluctant to display EPC in prime advertising space and that this will require regular site visits to ensure compliance. Consideration should also be given to the Regulatory Impact Assessment for the enforcement of this proposal. Consideration for the additional staff resource must be evaluated as already district councils experience stretched resources. What additional funding will be available from Central Government to reduce the extra burden on district councils? Page 64 13 Q4.5.2.Do you agree with the proposal to amend Part 7 of the 2008 Regulations to include a new breach of duty for which a penalty charge notice may be issued for buildings with a total useful floor area greater than 500m2 and frequently visited by the public for which an EPC has been issued but has not been displayed? Yes No No view Comments (if any): as per Q 4.5.1 Clarifying the meaning of “Total Useful Floor Area” Q5.1. Do you agree with the proposal to define the term “total useful floor area” in accordance with the Building Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012 to mean “the total area of all enclosed spaces measured to the inside face of the external walls, that is, the gross floor area, and in the case of sloping surfaces such as staircases, galleries, raked auditoria and tiered terraces shall be taken as their area on plan but shall exclude areas that are not enclosed such as open floors, covered ways and balconies”? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Page 65 16 Q5.3.2. Do you agree with the proposal to amend Part 6 of the 2008 Regulations permitting the keeper of the Register to release any document or data to the Department for the Department’s or other Departments statistical or research purposes and for the purpose of providing impartial advice on improving a building’s energy efficiency? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Q5.3.3. Do you agree with the proposal to amend Regulation 10 of the 2008 Regulations to permit the keeper of the Register to disclose any document or data to an accredited energy assessor solely where they have been engaged by a relevant person and for legitimately connected with the assessment of that building? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Page 68 17 Q5.3.4. Do you agree with the proposal to amend Part 6 of the 2008 Regulations permitting the keeper of the Register to disclose to the Department any document or data relating to the energy performance of buildings occupied by a public authority for the purpose of raising awareness? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Lodgement of air-conditioning inspection reports on the Northern Ireland Register Q5.4. Do you agree with the proposal to amend Part 4 of the 2008 Regulations requiring all air-conditioning inspection reports to be lodged on the Northern Ireland Register? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Consider wording the regulations to include the lodgement of all air- conditioning inspection certificates. The nature of air-conditioning inspection reports (ACIR) should be in a standard format and one which will permit the capture of photographs. Consider the format of ACIR/ air-conditioning certificate highlighting an energy rating, this would be in alignment with EPC and DEC energy rating. Page 69 18 Mandating the provision of energy data Q5.5. Do you agree with the proposal to amend the 2008 Regulations requiring landlords in the non-domestic sector to provide accurate energy use data to energy assessors? Yes No No view Comments (if any): Will this breach incur a PCN? Consideration should be given to the Regulatory Impact Assessment for the enforcement of this proposal. Evaluation of the additional staff resource should be undertaken as already district councils experience stretched resources. What additional funding will be available from Central Government to reduce the extra burden on district councils? Further amendments to clarify the 2008 Regulations Q5.6.1. Do you agree with the proposal to amend Part 7 of the 2008 Regulations to include a breach of duty for failing to carry out a first air-conditioning inspection by the relevant date? Yes No No view Comments (if any): However, it should be noted that currently it is impossible for relevant persons to gain compliance as the numbers of accredited assessors are limited and the time taken to carry out an assessment and collate the report, especially for the more complex systems, can be extensive. Consideration should be given to including a lead-in time for having an air- conditioning inspection carried out due to limited numbers of Energy Assessors. Page 70 Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Extension of Bring Site Contracts by arc21 Joint Committee Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Tim Walker, Head of Waste Management, ext 3311 Contact Officer: Brendan Murray, Waste Manager, Service Planning and Delivery, ext 3333 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Members will be aware that arc21 acts on behalf of its eleven constituent councils to procure services in support of the implementation of the arc21 Waste Plan. In April 2011, arc21 awarded contracts for the servicing of glass, paper, textile and can recycling at the Household Recycling Centres (HRCs), Civic Amenity (CA) sites and mini bring sites. The Committee is reminded that, at its meeting on 3rd February 2011, it ratified the arc21 Joint Committee’s decision to award the glass, paper and can collection and recycling contracts. At the time of award of the arc21 contracts, the Council, due to existing contractual obligations, opted out of the arc21 textile contract. However, with the Council’s textile collection contract ending on 30th June 2012, the Committee, at its meeting on 16th April, granted approval for the Service to buy into the arc21 textile contract with Cookstown Textiles, the same contractor that the Council was previously using for this service. The arc21 contract now achieves better income than that previously awarded by the Council due to economies of scale. All the Bring Site contracts were awarded for a period of two years from 1st April, 2011 until 31st March, 2013, with the option to extend for a further two years. In line with the arc21 “Terms of Agreement”, this requires that decisions made by the Joint Committee regarding the award of contracts will be discussed by the constituent councils prior to them coming into force. 2 Key Issues 2.1 At the arc21 Steering Group meeting on 21st August 2012, councils were made aware of the current contractual arrangements for the provision of the Bring Site Collection Service which will expire on 31st March, 2013. However, the contracts allow for the option to extend for up to a further two years. Agenda Item 4aPage 73 2.2 2.3 In developing the business case to establish the most appropriate option to take, the following aspects were considered:
market conditions;
contractor performance;
contractor feedback;
individual council views;
other influencing factors e.g. fuel prices. Having duly considered these matters in the business case, it is recommended that the most appropriate option is to exercise the option to extend the existing contracts 3 Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 3.3 Financial The costs and income streams associated with the bring site contracts are included within the Waste Management revenue estimates. Human Resources There no additional human resource implications with these contracts, the existing Waste Management Contract staff will manage and monitor these contracts. Asset and Other Implications There are no asset or other implications associated with this report 4 Equality and Good Relations Considerations 4.1 The recycling receptacles at the different HRCs, CA sites and bring sites permit ease of access for people with mobility issues. 5 Recommendation 5.1 The Committee is recommended to ratify the recommendations of the arc21 Joint Committee, that the bring site collection service contracts be extended for a further two years from 1st April, 2013 until 31st March, 2015 on the following basis:
Glass Recycling – Glassdon Recycling
Mixed Paper – Greenstar
Mixed Cans – Glassdon Recycling
Textiles – Cookstown Textiles The terms and conditions of the contracts and the rates and prices remain as per the existing contracts. 6 Decision Tracking If approved by the Committee, the Head of Waste Management will make the necessary arrangements with arc21. 8 Documents Attached None. Page 74 Belfast City Council Report to: Health & Environmental Services Committee Subject: Tender for the Collection and Treatment of Oil and Water Based Paints and Varnishes from the Council’s Recycling Centres Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Tim Walker, Head of Waste Management, ext 3311 Contact Officer: Brendan Murray, Waste Manager – Service Planning and Delivery, ext 3333 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 Under the Hazardous Waste Regulations (NI) 2005, oil based paints and varnishes are classed as hazardous wastes. As a “waste producer”, there is a requirement upon the Council to appropriately store and dispose wastes deemed as hazardous under these regulations. Hazardous wastes are not permitted to be disposed of at the arc21 procured landfill sites. In addition, in line with the requirements of the EU Landfill Directive, these sites cannot accept liquid wastes, so water based paints and varnishes also should not be disposed of at these sites. Due to the hazardous nature of the waste paints and varnishes, these are collected at the Council’s appropriately licenced recycling centres at Alexandra Park, Blackstaff Way, Palmerston Road and Ormeau, prior to removal and treatment. Furthermore, the Service has a legislative requirement to ensure that, under the “Duty of Care”, these wastes are appropriately logged and that all hazardous waste movements are recorded. This allows the Northern Ireland Environmental Agency (NIEA) to audit the administrative paper-chain (consignment note) to ensure that the materials have been managed and disposed of at a suitably licenced hazardous waste treatment facility. The current contract for the collection and treatment of these wastes commenced on 1st April, 2009 and will expire on 31st March, 2013. The Service intends to let a further contract for the collection and treatment of oil and water-based paints and varnishes from the Council’s recycling centres for a period of one year, with the option to extend for a further two years depending on satisfactory performance. 2 Key Issues 2.1 2.2 In order to meet legislative compliance under the Hazardous Waste Regulations (NI) 2005 and the EU Landfill Directive, the Council must dispose of oil based paints and varnishes in an appropriate manner and landfill is not an acceptable option. The Council has therefore entered into a contract for the provision of a collection and treatment service of these materials from its four recycling centres. The provision of this service is essential as the Council is legally deemed to be a “waste producer” regarding the receipt of the public’s oil and water based paints and varnishes. Provision of this service will ensure proper treatment and disposal of these hazardous substances in compliance with the law and reduce the potential risk to the environment. Agenda Item 4bPage 75 2.4 The contract period will be for an initial one year period with the option for renewal on a yearly basis thereafter, for a further two years, subject to satisfactory performance. 3 Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 3.3 Financial Based on historical data, the annual cost for the collection and treatment of 3,000 tonnes of mixed waste timber is estimated to be in the region of £140,000. The landfill disposal costs for this material would be approximately £240,000, exclusive of any transportation costs. The contract therefore represents good value for money compared with sending the material to landfill. The cost of the service has been included in the Service’s revenue budgets. Human Resources There are no human relations issues associated with this service. Asset and Other Implications None 4 Equality and Good Relations Considerations 4.1 None 5 Recommendation 5.1 5.2 The Committee is requested to grant approval to commence an EU tendering exercise for the collection and treatment of mixed waste timber from the Council’s Household Recycling Centres. Approval is also requested for the Director of Environmental Services to be granted delegated authority under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to award the contract to the most economically advantageous tender. 6 Decision Tracking The Head of Waste Management will oversee the award of this contract and will seek the appropriate tender award authority from the Director of Health and Environmental Services in line with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation. 7 Documents Attached None Page 78 Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Consultation on Amending the Waste Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011 Date: 3rd October 2012 Reporting Officer: Tim Walker, Head of Waste Management, ext 3311 Contact Officer: Jennifer Stephens, Waste Policy & Compliance Officer, ext 3439 1.0 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Members will recall that, at the meeting on 17th September, the future options for the collection of dry recyclables and food waste in the inner city were considered. Following a detailed options appraisal and analysis of the costs, benefits and risks associated with the various options, Members agreed that a redesigned kerbside sort collection scheme should be tendered for on a relatively short-term basis (3 years). One of the key factors in arriving at this decision was the uncertainty around the policy and regulatory framework and, in particular, the legislative obligations contained within the European Union revised Waste Framework Directive (rWFD), specifically the need for this waste to be “collected separately.” The Waste (England & Wales) Regulations have been challenged by way of an application for a Judicial Review on the grounds that they do not correctly transpose the rWFD regarding “separate collection” and specifically allow co-mingled collections to be regarded as a form of separate collection. The DoE is aware that a challenge along the same lines may be prepared locally. In light of this legal action, the Department of the Environment proposes to amend the Waste Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011, by removing Regulation 21 which currently provides that co-mingled collection shall be regarded as a separate collection. The fourteen page consultation paper invites views on the proposals to amend the Waste Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011, in respect of the provisions relating to separate collection. 2.0 Key Issues 2.1 2.2 In response to a legal challenge on the Waste (England & Wales) Regulations 2011, the DOE has issued a consultation document on amending Regulation 21 of the Waste Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011. As it currently stands, Regulation 21 provides that comingled collection shall be regarded as separate collection. The crux of the legal challenge is that the treatment of co-mingled collection as a form of Agenda Item 4dPage 79 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 separate collection is contrary to the aims of Article 10 (2) of the rWFD which states that “…waste shall be collected separately if technically, environmentally and economically practicable and shall not be mixed with other waste or other material with different properties.” The DOE has taken legal advice and has liaised with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Welsh Government who have undertaken to amend their legislation accordingly. The DOE is therefore seeking an amendment to the Waste Regulations (NI) 2011 so that the legislation more closely reflects the obligations laid out under the rWFD. The main amendment to the Regulations is the proposal to remove Regulation 21 which states that co-mingled collection is regarded as separate collection. The DoE is also taking this opportunity to make some slight amendments to the subordinate legislation for the purposes of accuracy and completeness. The DOE has stated that following the consultation process it intends to produce guidance for the key stakeholders on the implications of the revised Waste Regulations (NI) 2011. The Waste Management Service has liaised with arc21 over the formal response to the consultation document and members are requested to endorse the attached arc21 response. 3 Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 3.3 Financial There are no financial costs associated with this report. At the meeting on 17th September, Members were informed of the projected savings which could arise from the introduction of a kerbside sort collection scheme in the inner city, which is recognised as a separate collection regime. Human Resources There are no human relations issues associated with this report. Asset and Other Implications None 4 Equality Implications 4.1 In terms of responding to the consultation document, there are no equality implications. 5 Recommendation 5.1 The Committee is requested to endorse the attached arc21 response in relation to the consultation document on the Waste Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011. 6 Decision Tracking The Head of Waste Management will keep the Committee informed of the progress of the proposed amendments to the Regulations. 7 Document Attached arc21 response to consultation on amending the Waste Regulations (NI) 2011 Page 80 Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee. Subject: Loo of the Year Awards - 25th Anniversary Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Tim Walker, Head of Waste Management, ext 3311 Contact Officer: Brendan Murray, Waste Manager – Service Planning and Delivery, ext 3333 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 1.2 1.3 Members may recall that the Council is assessed each year by the British Toilet Association (BTA) regarding the standard of public toilets. The BTA is the main organisation for promoting and improving standards in “away from home” public toilets in the UK. Its activities include raising awareness and recognising good practice through national “Loo of the Year Awards”. The awards are sponsored by private companies and local tourist boards. The awards have been taking place since 1987 and the Council has been successful over the years due to the high standards of its public toilet facilities. Last year, the Council gained 12 five star awards for its public toilet provision and was ranked 7th overall in the UK in the category of “Local Authority Public Toilets”. This year is the 25th anniversary of the Loo of the Year awards. To mark this milestone achievement, the Loo of the Year awards event will be held on 7th December at the Chesford Grange Hotel in Birmingham. 2 Key Issues 2.1 2.2 The 25th anniversary of Loo of the Year awards will be held in Birmingham on 7th December. The Waste Management Service has entered the following public toilet facilities to this year’s Loo of the Year awards.
Winetavern Street
Church Lane
Arthur Lane
Agnes Street
Lombard Street (APC)
Customs House Square (APC)
Gasworks Park (APC)
Antrim Road (APC) Agenda Item 4ePage 83 2.3 2.4
Dublin Road (APC)
Ormeau Embankment
Drumglass Park, Lisburn Road
Connswater, Holywood Arches The overall results are to be announced at the awards ceremony on 7th December, 2012. Members will be updated on the Council’s achievement after the awards ceremony. To celebrate this event and in recognition of the sterling work of staff involved in providing high standard public toilet facilities, the Service is seeking to send delegates to the awards ceremony. 3 Resource Implications 3.1 3.2 Financial The cost of attendance at the awards ceremony to cover the event, flights and taxis will be in the region of £300 per person. This cost will be met from the Service’s revenue estimates. Asset and Other Implications The awards represent ongoing recognition of the continual service provision which the Council has taken to provide away from home public toilet facilities for the residents and visitors to Belfast. 4 Equality Implications 4.1 There are no Equality implications associated with this report. 5 Recommendation 5.1 It is recommended that approval be granted for the Chairman and the Head of Waste Management (or their nominees) to attend the awards ceremony in Birmingham on 7th December. Decision Tracking None. Key to Abbreviations APC – Automatic Public Convenience Documents Attached None Page 84 Belfast City Council Report to: Health and Environmental Services Committee Subject: Update on the Work of the Clean Cities Working Group Date: 3rd October, 2012 Reporting Officer: Sam Skimin, Head of Cleansing Services, ext 5273 Contact Officer: Sam Skimin, Head of Cleansing Services, ext 5273 1 Relevant Background Information 1.1 In November 2010, the Committee considered a report on the Clean Cities Working Group of the Eurocities Environment Forum. The Committee was advised of the leading role undertaken by the Council in getting this group established to widen the debate on local environmental quality issues within Europe. Members gave permission for an officer from Cleansing Services to attend both the Environmental Forum and Clean Cities Working Group meetings and since then Belfast has chaired the Clean Cities Working Group (see attached minute). 2 Key Issues 2.1 2.2 Belfast chaired the Clean Cities Working Group since its inception until passing on this role to the city of Copenhagen in February, 2012. Belfast is represented by the Community Awareness Manager within Cleansing Services. The Officer also attends the Eurocities Environment Forum which, is usually scheduled at the same time and venue as the Clean Cities Working Group, to reduce cost of attendance. The Group’s main objective is to facilitate the exchange of best practice by cities on operational and community based initiatives which will promote clean and attractive cities and change behaviours on illegal depositing of litter and waste and to address other associated activities which negatively impact on our cities. The Working Group meets approximately three times a year, has thirteen active member cities and delivers on an annual agreed work plan. The Working Group reports to the Executive Committee of the EUROCITIES network. Since its formation in 2006, the Group has delivered a number of key outputs including:
A Best Practice Exchange Report on effective approaches to changing littering behaviour in relation to ‘environmental crimes’ (2006)
‘Our Clean Cities’ best practice guide (2007)
‘Greening Major Events: marathons, footraces and other sporting events’ best practice guide (2009)
Waste Collection Practices throughout Europe (joint Clean Cities Working Group and Waste Working Group research study) (2009) Agenda Item 5aPage 85