Provision of Household Waste Recycling Centre Services Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 2015 Review

Aims

Norfolk’s recycling centre service forms part of the waste disposal service provided by County Council (NCC), with a core aim of reducing the impact of waste on the environment.

The aims of the recycling centre strategy are set out below:

• Review the existing strategy and determine whether it meets current requirements;

• develop a strategic network of recycling centres that promote the waste hierarchy;

• maintain or increase customer satisfaction; and

• reduce costs and make savings to the authority;

Executive Summary

The existing service standard for recycling centre provision has been in place since 1985. Improvements to kerbside recycling, recycling centres and travel times provide an opportunity to review the standard 30 years on. Forecast population growth and inadequacies in some sites mean that development of the current network will be required over the next few years. The recycling centre strategy proposes a series of changes including updating the service standard to a more relevant ‘drive-time’, updating the current infrastructure to meet both current and future needs over the next decade and a number of cost-saving options including redesigning the network and reviewing the locations of sites to allow a smaller, more strategically linked, network of sites to cover Norfolk.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 1 1 Contents Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy ...... 1 1 Introduction ...... 3 2 Statutory Obligations ...... 3 3 Norfolk County Councils 20 Principles of Waste ...... 5 4 Existing Recycling Centre Provision ...... 7 4.1 Recycling Centre Locations & Opening Hours ...... 7 4.2 Recycling Streams ...... 8 4.3 Service Provision across the County ...... 8 4.4 Visitor Numbers...... 13 4.5 Tonnages and Recycling Performance ...... 15 4.6 Customer Satisfaction ...... 21 4.7 Cost of the Existing Service ...... 25 4.8 Infrastructure ...... 26 4.9 Agreed Changes to the Service ...... 27 5 Alternative Recycling Facilities in Norfolk ...... 27 5.1 Kerbside Collection ...... 27 5.2 Master Composters and Community Composting ...... 28 5.3 Community Recycling Banks ...... 29 6 Pressures on the Recycling Centre Service ...... 30 6.1 Required Financial Savings ...... 30 6.2 Fluctuations in levels of waste ...... 31 6.3 Predicted Housing Growth ...... 31 6.4 Other Major Infrastructure ...... 33 6.5 Site Constraints ...... 33 6.6 Changes in Legislation ...... 34 7 Future Infrastructure Provision ...... 35 7.1 Maintain existing Service Provision ...... 35 7.2 Review the Existing 8.5 mile Service Standard ...... 36 7.3 Improvements Required at Existing Sites ...... 39 7.4 Redesign of the Recycling Centre Network ...... 43 8 Conclusion and Recommendations ...... 52

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 2 2 1 Introduction

NCC operates 20 recycling centres across the county.

Nationally such sites have many different names but all come under the generic term of Civic Amenity (CA) sites. In Norfolk, our CA sites are known as recycling centres.

Over the last few years a number of changes have been introduced at Norfolk’s recycling centres in order to bring improvements and efficiency savings.

A review of Norfolk’s recycling centre provision has been undertaken in order to identify further potential improvements and efficiency savings with the following aims:

• To review our statutory obligations under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, section 51 and how best to meet those obligations within financial constraints; • To ensure we continue to meet the needs of residents in the most efficient and economical way; and • To explore opportunities that may exist to reduce cost.

The review is based on:

• historic and modelled analysis of waste throughputs; • historical and comparative performance against the national waste hierarchy of prevention, reuse, recycling, energy recovery and disposal in that order; • comparative service provision with other authorities; • site tonnage throughput and resident use; • accessibility; and • current and modelled population change.

2 Statutory Obligations

The County Council, as a Waste Disposal Authority (WDA), is required under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, section 51, to provide reasonably accessible sites for the free disposal of household waste. There is no specified minimum required number of sites or mandatory opening times although they must be open for part of either Saturday or Sunday.

Whilst the above arrangements allow for the deposit of household waste free of charge, legislation also allows for the sites to be made available for the deposit of household or other controlled waste by other persons on such terms as to payment (if any) as the Council determines.

Advice from NPLaw indicates that the legislation does require "places" and that logically it must therefore depend on the size and nature of an authority's

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 3 3 area. The authority will have to employ reasonableness and proportionality into any decision it takes and if it can show good reasons that are well thought out and having regard to all factors it would demonstrate a measured approach.

Therefore the County Council could decide that one facility satisfies that duty if it could demonstrate that reasonableness and proportionality had been achieved, whereas other authorities may consider that they require more sites. It also means that not all wastes have to be accepted at all sites. Other wastes can be also accepted (household waste from non-residents or non- householders, or non-household wastes) and it is permitted for charges to be levied for the disposal of these wastes.

The Controlled Waste Regulations 2012 define construction and demolition and including preparatory works as non-household. WRAP1 in their 2012 “Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) Guide confirm that construction and demolition waste from households is not defined as household waste for the purposes of Section 51 of the Environmental Protection Act. Examples of construction and demolition waste from households could include:

• Doors and windows • Fitted kitchens • Fitted wardrobes • Inert material such as rubble and concrete, bricks and roof tiles • Plasterboard • Soil from landscaping activities • Any other building materials.

However many local authorities appreciate that these types of wastes can be generated by householders and they therefore need to dispose of this waste. Several authorities have limited the quantity that can be disposed of for free within the recycling centre network, in order to minimise potential abuse from traders whilst providing a service to the householder. Norfolk is one such authority.

Some authorities have sought to argue that, as long as a WDA has fulfilled its statutory duty to provide facilities that are reasonably accessible, available at all reasonable times and allow for household waste to be disposed free of charge, they could operate additional discretionary recycling centres outside of Section 51 of the EPA 1990 and thus charge for household waste received at these additional sites.

Prior to April 2015, it was considered that a discretionary charge for disposal of household waste could be applied under through providing sites under Section 93 of the Local Government Act 2003. However, government have

1 The Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) works with businesses, individuals and communities to achieve a circular economy through helping them reduce waste, develop sustainable products and use resources in an efficient way.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 4 4 recently taken steps to change the law in order to prohibit charging householders for the deposition of household waste at recycling centres provided by a WDA.

Other relevant legislation for the operation of the recycling centre service is outlined below:

Waste Framework Directive – strengthens the waste hierarchy (prevention, preparing for reuse, recycling, other recovery, and disposal)

Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010 – operators of certain waste facilities. Including recycling centres, are required to demonstrate competency of staff in operating the facility and hold an environmental permit

Controlled Waste ( and Wales) Regulations 2012 – sets out a definition of household, commercial and industrial waste.

Waste Electronic and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006 – aims to reduce the amount of WEEE going to landfill through increasing collection of waste electrical equipment. The regulations make the producer responsible for covering the cost of collection and treatment of WEEE and they must take it from consumers free of charge.

Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 – control the storage, transport and disposal of hazardous waste to minimise risk associated with it.

Batteries Directive 2006/66/EC – aims to improve the environmental performance of those involved in the life cycle of batteries, in particular those dealing with the treatment and recycling of waste batteries. Producers of batteries are given responsibility for the waste management of batteries that they have place on the market.

Localism Act 2011- gives community groups and local organisations the right to express an interest in taking over an authority run service and gives them the power to initiate a local referendum on issues.

Equalities Act 2010 - disabled people should be treated equally with access to goods and services, facilities, transport, education and employment.

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 – all recycling centres require appropriate planning consent to be issued in order to operate.

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) 1992 – the local authority and operating contractor of a recycling centre are responsible for ensuring the safety of staff working on site, including the safe management of traffic.

3 Norfolk County Councils 20 Principles of Waste

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 5 5 In December 2014, agreed 20 policies or ‘Principles of Waste’ for dealing with household and commercial waste collected by Norfolk authorities.

The principles are:

1 Any proposed waste treatment facility in Norfolk will reduce dependency on landfill and must be further up the waste hierarchy than incineration; 2 Incineration of waste or fuel derived from waste is accepted outside Norfolk and any such arrangements should be reviewed by Committee on an annual basis; 3 The delivery of area treatment plants to be facilitated by any procurement for residual waste services. Proximity to services should be a part of evaluating solutions; 4 Waste Collection Authorities (WCAs) should have appropriate local delivery points within or very close to their areas as far as is practical; 5 Operators of local delivery points should be incentivized to recover material for reuse and recycling from left over rubbish delivered by Waste Collection Authorities; 6 The approach to the delivery of effective and affordable waste disposal and collection services in Norfolk should be reviewed with other local authorities; 7 The County Council, as a part of the Norfolk Waste Partnership, will work with it in the development of policy, strategy and procurement decisions relating to waste services before they are implemented; 8 County Council services and contracts should be developed in a way that would facilitate working as a virtual or actual combined waste authority or authorities; 9 Plans and strategies are to be developed using reliable data and robust evidence to ensure the delivery of an efficient, effective and affordable waste management service that promotes the implementation of the most practical, social, environmental and economically acceptable solutions; 10 To minimise as far as possible the residual waste requiring disposal; 11 Services to treat residual waste are to support and allow for an increase in repair, reduction, re-use and recycling of waste; 12 Processes to treat residual waste are to divert high levels of waste from landfill; 13 To improve and increase recycling of waste and support improving the effectiveness of recycling collection systems; 14 To work on reducing the growth in municipal waste by promoting waste and food waste reduction and reuse initiatives and education programmes; 15 To promote waste awareness through public education and awareness campaigns and to develop the understanding of the full range of options available for dealing with waste including County Council Recycling Centres;

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 6 6 16 Food waste collections by Waste Collection Authorities linked to treatment by anaerobic digestion process to be supported; 17 Processes to treat residual waste must deliver guaranteed reductions in the costs of dealing with left over rubbish; 18 Residual waste processes, including innovative solutions, must satisfy due diligence processes and be capable of securing funding or already operational; 19 The County Council should explore the full range of funding options for the delivery of waste treatment services; 20 The carbon footprint is to be part of the evaluation of any proposal to treat waste that the County Council is responsible for as a Waste Disposal Authority.

The principles of waste will be addressed when considering the options for future recycling centre provision.

4 Existing Recycling Centre Provision

4.1 Recycling Centre Locations & Opening Hours

Norfolk currently provides 20 Recycling Centres across the county. 19 of these sites are operated through a service level agreement by NEWS (part of the Norse group) and 1 is operated through a separate contract by FCC Environment.

The Council currently provides three levels of service: • Main Recycling Centre (MRC) Plus (provide ‘pay as you throw’ facilities for DIY waste, the acceptance of tyres for a small fee and a re-use area). • Main Recycling Centres (provide a standard service). • Part-Time Main Recycling Centres (closed Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays).

The location of sites can be seen on the map in figure 1. Opening times are broadly consistent across sites, the exception being the Mile Cross site in (full details included at Appendix A). All sites operate summer and winter hours.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 7 7

Figure 1: Map showing locations of Norfolk's Recycling Centres

4.2 Recycling Streams

Currently the recycling centres take 22 separate waste streams for reuse, recycling or disposal. The full list of materials is provided in Appendix A.

The Main Plus recycling centres offer additional services with a ‘pay as you throw’ DIY service, for residents wishing to dispose of more than the concessionary one 80 litre bag (or equivalent) or 1 item per week.

7 of the county’s Main Recycling Centre Plus sites have reuse shops. Residents have the opportunity to donate items for resale and site staff are responsible for managing the shop and pricing items for sale. The primary objective is to divert material from disposal and therefore the items are priced accordingly. Income from the reuse shops covers the running costs and provides a small income to NCC.

New materials are trialled at selected sites from time to time, such as mattress recycling and rigid plastic. These materials are being offered on a trial basis only to ensure that an appropriate end destination is found and that the volumes collected can be adequately dealt with whilst providing an environmental and financial benefit to NCC.

4.3 Service Provision across the County

The Councils current policy regarding the provision of recycling centres goes back to 1985 when the Waste Disposal Sub-Committee agreed a policy proposal whereby the provision of Household Waste Sites (now recycling

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 8 8 centres) is determined by using catchment areas of 8.5 miles radius (approximately 10 road miles).

It is approaching 30 years since this policy was introduced and there have been a number of changes during that time, including: • The nature and type of vehicles householders use when visiting the recycling centres; • Public expectations regarding recycling; • The introduction of and an increase in the range of recyclable materials at the recycling centres; • The introduction of Waste Collection Authority (WCA) kerbside recycling schemes; • An overall drop in tonnage throughput at the sites but also increased recycling levels.

Currently, from Friday to Monday 96% of the population are within 8.5 miles of a Main Recycling Centre. This drops to 93% from Tuesday to Thursday as a result of closures at part-time sites.

WRAP2 provide some guidance on levels of recycling centre provision in their Household Waste Recycling Centre Guidance (October 2012). It suggests the following coverage provides a good minimum level of provision except for very rural or very urban areas:

• Maximum catchment radii for a large proportion of the population: 3 to 5 miles (very rural areas: 7 miles). • Maximum driving times for the great majority of residents in good traffic conditions: 20 minutes (very rural areas: 30 minutes). • Maximum number of inhabitants per HWRC (in all but the most urbanised areas): 120,000. • Maximum number of households per HWRC (in all but the most urbanised areas): 50,000.

In its 2012 “Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) Guide” WRAP recognised that levels of provision are currently under the spotlight, and that a number of local authorities are closing some sites due to budget pressures.

Table 1 shows examples of current standards used by other local authorities. The counties in the list below are considered comparison authorities under the Nearest Neighbours Model 2014 (English Authorities).

2 The Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) works with businesses, individuals and communities to achieve a circular economy through helping them reduce waste, develop sustainable products and use resources in an efficiency way.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 9 9 Table 1: Summary of Service Provision in other Local Authorities County Service Provision Standard

Norfolk 8.5 mile radius 20 minute drive for 90% of residents Lincolnshire 95% of the population within a 12 mile radius Somerset An historic policy of 5 mile radius but recent service changes have been made based around an average drive time of 20 minutes from population centres. Worcestershire No current policy Staffordshire No formal policy in place. Used WRAP guidance on site provision to undertake a recycling centre rationalisation. North Yorkshire 20 minutes drive for 95% of residents, no site to serve more than 69,000 people. Devon Provide a permanent Recycling Centre within 10 miles of every household in Devon where economically practicable. Leicestershire 5 mile radius Northamptonshire No formal policy on catchment areas. Current contractor has to provide an off-site reuse shop within a 5 mile radius of any recycling centre. Lancashire Informally 1 recycling centre per district, they have 12 districts and 15 recycling centre (have closed 8 sites since 2011).

The table demonstrates that not all authorities have a service standard in relation to recycling centre provision. Several authorities base their service standard on a fixed mileage with North Yorkshire and Suffolk using a drive- time standard. Devon have added to their 10 mile radius policy the wording ‘economically practicable’, allowing some flexibility around sites that have proven to be very costly to operate. It is of note that many of the authorities contacted reported they are currently reviewing recycling centre provision with a need to find cost savings.

Norfolk has a population of 857,888 people, or 372,085 households according to the 2011 census. As an average, Norfolk has 1 site per 42,894 residents, well within the WRAP guidelines (1 per 120,000 residents). This is the equivalent of 1 site per 18,064 households, well within the recommended minimum provision of 1 site per 50,000 households. Table 2 provides a snap shot of average population per site in other counties around the UK, the information is summarised in Figure 2.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 10 10 Table 2: Summary of Population per Recycling Centres across other authorities3 County Population Number of Population per (2011 Census) Recycling Centres site North Yorkshire 601,200 20 30,060 Cumbria 499,900 14 35,707 Somerset 529,972 14 (free) 37,855 Devon 746,399 19 39,284 Norfolk 857,888 20 42,894 Leicestershire 650,489 14 46,463 Worcestershire 569,000 11 51,727 Lincolnshire 724,000 13 55,730 Warwickshire 545,474 9 60,608 Staffordshire 852,123 14 60,866 Nottinghamshire 785,800 12 65,458 Suffolk 730,100 11 66,372 Northamptonshire 706,647 10 70,664 Derbyshire 769,686 9 85,520 Lancashire 1,460,893 15 93,392 Gloucestershire 597,000 6 99,500

Recycling Centre Provision - County Comparison

120,000

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000

20,000 Population per Site per Population 0

County

Figure 2: Average Population per Recycling Centre - County Comparison

The data shows that Norfolk offers the largest number of sites, joint with North Yorkshire, at 20. Out of the 15 comparator authorities, Norfolk has the 5th lowest population per site figures. All counties are well within the WRAP guide of 1 site per 120,000 residents.

There is at least one site in each of Norfolk’s seven districts, as shown in table 3. Figure 3 shows the population per site within each district. In practice,

3 Figures calculated using 2011 census data and publicly available information on number of sites from local authority websites.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 11 11 residents may not use the site within their district as an alternative site may be closer or a preferred option for another reason.

Table 3: Number of recycling centres per district District Number of Sites King's Lynn 4 Norwich 1 Breckland 4 2 4 4 1

Figure 3: Summary of recycling centre provision per district

Norwich and Great Yarmouth have the most residents and households per site, close to or exceeding the WRAP guidelines. Breckland, North Norfolk and King’s Lynn have the lowest numbers of households and residents per site. This assumes residents visit the recycling centre in the district where they live, which in practice may not happen if an alternative site is closer or more convenient.

Figure 4 shows the population per site estimated from census data for electoral divisions. These figures differ from population per district as they are estimated based on distance from recycling centres (not constrained by district boundaries). This assumes that residents visit their closest site (as the crow flies) but surveys on site demonstrate that residents may visit sites

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 12 12 further away, perhaps on the way to work or other business or out of preference.

Norfolk is a diverse county with some rural areas and some more urban areas and some sites have a much more populated catchment area than others. Generally all of Norfolk’s sites fall well within the WRAP guidelines, with the exception of Mile Cross which serves a population of approximately 190,877 (this figure drops to 132, 512 when looking at population in Norwich City Council area as opposed to an 8.5 mile radius from site). However, it is likely that in practice Mile Cross does not serve this many residents and some will prefer to use Mayton Wood, or as an alternative.

Population Per Site

200000

180000

160000

140000

120000

100000

Population 80000

60000

40000

20000

0 Ashill Wells Caister Docking Worstead Mile Cross Mile King's Lynn Strumpshaw Bergh Ketteringham Mayton Wood Mayton Site

Figure 4: Population per site

Heacham, Hempton, Docking and Wells all display low population in the catchment area of the site. This area of Norfolk is not densely populated and has a relatively high number of recycling centres for the population.

4.4 Visitor Numbers

A traffic survey, across all sites, carried out in late 2013 and early 2014 provided an indication of visitor usage during opening hours.

The traffic survey shows an estimated 1.4 million visits per year across all sites.

Visitor numbers appear steady during opening hours on a weekday but tail off at about 4pm. At the weekend, they are lower in the first and last hours of the day as shown in figure 4.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 13 13 Percentage breakdown of daily visits per hour

25.00

20.00

Sun Sept 15.00 Mon Sept Tues Sept Sun Jan 10.00 Mon Jan Tues Jan % of daily visitors of% daily 5.00

0.00 09:00 - 10:00 - 11:00 - 12:00 - 13:00 - 14:00 - 15:00 - 16:00 - 17:00 - 18:00- 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 T ime

Figure 5: Daily visits recorded during 2013/14 traffic surveys

The survey suggests that most usage of the sites is made between the hours of 11:00 and 12:00 with a further peak in usage between 14:00 and 15:00. There are a reduced number of users at the start and end of each day.

The visitor numbers show that the busiest sites are the Plus sites, with Sheringham and Worstead being the busiest main sites. Table 4 shows the sites in order of the average number of visitors they receive per day.

Ashill is the quietest full time site and this site was due to be made part time under the Putting People First savings in 2015-16 (proposals have subsequently been put on hold to change opening hours). Usage at Ashill has dropped 28% since the 2010 surveys, possibly due to the opening of a new Plus site at Dereham in 2011.

Thetford has had an increase in visitor numbers of 30% since 2010, a new Plus site for Thetford was opened in December 2012 with a much larger capacity and this was part funded by the Thetford Growth Point project.

The 2010 traffic surveys were conducted shortly after the creation of part time sites (in Oct/Nov 2010 and January 2011). All sites that are part time have seen a decrease in visitor numbers between 2010 and 2014 except for Wells. There is no clear pattern to suggest that where sites became part time, the closest full time site saw a corresponding increase in visitor numbers.

Other notable decreases in site usage appear to be at Sheringham (-22%), Ketteringham (-24%), Hempton (-30%) and Strumpshaw (-27%).

It should be noted however that the traffic surveys only capture a small window of time and may not fully represent the overall pattern. These should be viewed in conjunction with tonnage.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 14 14 Since the start of the SLA with NEWS, improved Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) has been in operation which can be used to make a more detailed assessment of patterns in visitor numbers.

Table 4: Average number of visitors per day (Blue highlight denotes Main Plus site, yellow denotes a main site, pink is a part time site) Rank Average Rank Average % Change 2014 visits per 2010 visits per (visitor Sites day 2014 day 2010 numbers) 1 Mile Cross 682 1 624 +9% 2 King's Lynn 385 2 357 +8% 3 Caister 302 3 297 +2% 4 Thetford 284 7 218 +30% 5 Dereham 273 - - 6 Mayton Wood 197 10 202 -2% 7 Sheringham 192 4 246 -22% 8 Worstead 183 11 195 -6% 9 Ketteringham 175 6 230 -24% 10 Wereham 166 9 203 -18% 11 Hempton 163 5 233 -30% 12 Heacham 154 13 150 +3% 13 Strumpshaw 152 8 207 -27% 14 Morningthorpe 134 17 122 +10% 15 Snetterton 126 16 142 -11% 16 Bergh Apton 120 14 149 -19% 17 Wymondham 119 12 179 -34% 18 Wells-Next-The-Sea 107 18 102 +5% 19 Ashill 106.5 15 148 -28% 20 Docking 75 19 95 -21% TOTAL 4095.5 4099 -0.1%

4.5 Tonnages and Recycling Performance

Residents are asked to separate their rubbish and recycle wherever possible and as a result diversion from landfill levels have increased from 56% in 2007/08 to 74% in 2013/14.

Up to twenty-two materials are accepted for recycling, the majority of which are not collected by the WCAs as part of their kerbside recycling collections. The County Council network of recycling centres provides additional opportunities for the recycling of other household materials, to the benefit of both countywide and individual WCA recycling performance. If materials were to instead appear in the kerbside residual waste bin, it would have a negative impact on recycling performance.

In 2013/14, 42.8% of Norfolk's household waste was recycled, reused and composted. Table 5 shows a summary of countywide recycling rates by

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 15 15 district. The recycling centres contributed around 11% towards countywide recycling performance. Note that the table refers to recycling rate, 64% for the recycling centres, which differs from diversion from landfill rate (74% for recycling centres). The diversion from landfill rate also includes figures for incineration, as well as recycling, reuse and composting.

Table 5: Countywide recycling rates Council Area Waste Recycled & Composted Total tonnage Reuse % % recycled, reused & composted % Breckland* 49,394 21 14 36 Broadland* 46,399 22 21** 44 Great Yarmouth* 34,661 21 4 25 KL&WN* 53,801 22 21** 43 North Norfolk* 41,088 23 16 40 Norwich City* 43,784 23 11** 35 South Norfolk* 45,097 24 15 39 County Council 65,890 30 34 64 20 Recycling Centres County Total 379,873 24 19 43 * % include recycling, reuse and composting carried out by Norfolk's Waste Collection Authorities as well as that by Town and Parish Councils, Charities and Voluntary Organisations. ** includes food waste collections

Historically the total amount of waste arisings across all recycling centres has slowly declined. In 2007/08, 19 recycling centres dealt with 71,376 tonnes of waste which dropped to 65,890 in 2013/14 (across 20 recycling centres, excluding rubble). This is shown in Figure 6, which demonstrates that the total amount of waste has been decreasing up to 2012/13 and then starts to increase and the amount of waste recycled has been increasing as a proportion of this. In 2013/14, tonnages dealt with by each site ranged from just over 14,000 tonnes at Mile Cross (Norwich) down to just over 700 tonnes at Docking. These figures exclude rubble.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 16 16 Total Tonnage Throughput at Norfolk's Recycling Centres showing the split of wast recycled, recovered, incinerated and sent to landfill for disposal

80000

70000 Landfill 60000

50000 Incinerated without efw

40000 Recovered via Biomass, 30000 RDF or Incineration with energy recovery 20000 Recycled

10000

0 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Figure 6: Total annual tonnage through Norfolk’s Recycling Centres showing the split between waste sent to landfill and waste recycled.

Figure 7 shows total tonnages through the recycling centres since 2008-09 split into waste sent to landfill, recycled, incinerated (without energy from waste) and recovered via biomass, RDF or incineration with energy recovery.

The general trend shows increasing recycling rates, which begins to plateau in 2011-12. The apparent drop off in recycling rate in 2013-14 is due to a change in the reporting of timber disposal to include recovery, which was previously recorded as recycling and is now largely reported as recovery.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 17 17 Recycling Centre throughput

100%

90%

80%

70% % Landfill

60% % Incinerated without efw 50% % recovered via Biomass, RDF or 40% Incineration with energy recovery % Recycled 30% % of tonnage throughput tonnage % of 20%

10%

0% 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Year

Figure 7: Chart showing % of waste from Norfolk’s HWRCs sent to landfill, recycling, incineration and recovery

Figure 8 shows the pattern of tonnages per year at each site. Generally, tonnage has decreased at each site although in 2013/14 the decrease appears to have slowed and in some cases, for example Mile Cross, the tonnage of waste has increased from the previous year.

There is a notable difference in the tonnage throughput between the busiest site, Mile Cross, and the quietest site, Docking. In 2013/14, Mile Cross took 20 times the amount of waste than Docking. Section 3.7 will look at the cost implications of this in more detail.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 18 18

2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Wymondham

Worstead

Wereham

Wells

Thetford

Strumpshaw

Snetterton

Sheringham Morningthorpe Morningthorpe

Site

Mile Cross Mile

Mayton Wood Mayton

Kings Lynn Kings

Ketteringham Hempton

Total Tonnage at Norfolk's Recycling Centres Recycling Tonnage Norfolk's at Total

Heacham

Docking

Dereham

Caister

Ashill Apton Bergh 0

8000 6000 4000 2000

16000 14000 12000 10000 Tonnage

Figure 8: Total annual tonnages at each of Norfolk’s Recycling Centres

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 19 19 Table 6 shows the difference between the total tonnage throughput in 2009/10 and 2013/14 and the percentage change between them. As was the case with the results of the traffic surveys, it can be seen that generally the Main Plus sites have the greatest tonnage and the part-time sites have the lowest tonnage. Hempton has a lower tonnage throughput than any other Plus site and equally a lower number of visits were recorded in the traffic survey than at other plus sites.

Ashill recorded the second lowest number of visitors in the 2014 traffic count, however, it can be seen that its tonnage throughput in 2014 was in line with other main recycling centres. It has, however, dropped by 31% since 2010 and this is likely to be attributed to the opening of a new Main Plus site at Dereham.

Of the sites that had experienced a notable decrease in visitor numbers between the 2010 and 2014 traffic surveys (Ketteringham, Sheringham, Strumpshaw and Hempton), Hempton has experienced a similar drop off in tonnage (25% decrease in tonnage and a 30% decrease in visitor numbers). The other sites have experienced smaller drops in their tonnage compared with the decrease in visitor numbers (e.g. Sheringham had a 22% decrease in visitor numbers but only an 11% decrease in tonnage) perhaps suggesting people are visiting less often but taking more waste per journey.

Table 6: Comparison of 2009/10 and 2013/14 tonnages (Blue denotes MRC Plus site, yellow denotes MRC, pink denotes MRC – part time)

Sites Rank Rank 2014 on (Based tonnage) Total Throughput Tonnage (Tonnes) 2009/10 Total Throughput Tonnage (Tonnes) 2013/14 % change 1 Mile Cross 14771.47 14027 -5% 2 Kings Lynn 5844.91 6260 7% 3 Caister 5832.61 5881 1% 4 Thetford 3842.73 3912 2% 5 Mayton Wood 3890.62 3481 -11% 6 Dereham1 - 3453 - 7 Ketteringham 3290.67 3188 -3% 8 Worstead 3191.09 3162 -1% 9 Sheringham 3542.55 3142 -11% 10 Strumpshaw 3260.08 2776 -15% 11 Hempton 3176.74 2388 -25% 12 Morningthorpe 1993.91 2218 11% 13 Ashill 2857.76 1983 -31% 14 Heacham 2161.39 1951 -10% 15 Wereham 2261.11 1924 -15%

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 20 20 16 Bergh Apton 1585.84 1573 -1% 17 Snetterton 1731.07 1528 -12% 18 Wymondham 1746.18 1428 -18% 19 Wells 931.21 914 -2% 20 Docking 808.23 701 -13% Total collected 66720.16 65890 -1% site opened in December 2011

4.6 Customer Satisfaction 4.6.1 Customer Satisfaction Survey

Overall, customer satisfaction has been increasing at Norfolk’s Recycling Centres. In 2005, 66% of users were satisfied overall with their local recycling centre and in 2014 satisfaction levels were at 83%, as shown in figure 9. These figures are based on the question relating to overall satisfaction with the recycling centre service. Customer satisfaction has been captured firstly through Mori Polls, then latterly through the tracker survey carried out by Norfolk County Council with the same questions asked each year for consistency.

Customer Satisfaction at Recycling Centres

90%

85%

80%

75%

70%

65%

60%

55% satisfaction Percentage

50% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 2013 2014 Year

Figure 9: Overall Customer Satisfaction Rates at Recycling Centres

A customer satisfaction survey carried out in 2012 resulted in responses from 1,420 members of the public. This survey was available to all householders, regardless of whether they were users of the site, and was specifically about the recycling centre service in order to support budget saving initiatives put forward as part of Norfolk ‘Putting People First’ consultation. A copy of the customer satisfaction survey can be found in Appendix B.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 21 21 The customer satisfaction survey showed the highest percentage of site users fall into the 55-64 age category, more males than females use the sites and the majority of site users surveyed were British.

Of the 1420 people who responded to the survey, 90.5% of people were users of the service.

89% of site users generally use the site closest to their home. Reasons for not using the site closest to home related to either staff attitude at their local site or choosing an alternative site for ease of access.

Of site users, the majority use a Recycling Centre either once a month or once every 3 months, as shown in Figure 10.

In the last 12 months, how often have you visited Recycling Centres? (Tick one only)

Weekly or more often Once every two weeks Once a month Once every 3 months Once every 6 months Once a year or less

Figure 10: Pie chart showing frequency of visits to a Recycling Centre

Overall, people were generally satisfied with the recycling centres. The graph in figure 11 shows levels of satisfaction with different aspects of Norfolk’s Recycling Centre service.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 22 22 How satisfied are you with the standard of the following aspects of the service at the Recycling Centre you use most often?

1200 1000 800 600 400 Very satisfied 200 Fairly satisfied 0 Neither Opening Overall If you have Access to the Signs telling Signs telling Parking and Fairly dissatisfied hours? helpfulness of difficulty in bins? you where to you what you manoeuvring Very dissatisfied staff? lifting or put things? can leave at at the site? Not applicable moving items that site? were you satisfied with the assistance

Figure 11: Satisfaction levels at Norfolk’s Recycling Centres

Of the 134 non-users that were surveyed, the main reasons given for not using the site were

• I don’t need to recycle any more than I can currently 45.4% • I don’t know where they are located 26.9% • I can’t get to a recycling centre because I do not have access to a car 23.5%

4.6.2 Compliments and Complaints

Data provided by the customer service centre show that in 2013/14, they dealt with 5,213 contacts relating to waste, of which there were 4,195 enquiries about the recycling centre service. Of these 59% were general policy queries, 19% related to the DIY policy and 22% were about opening hours.

In the same year, Norfolk County Council received 189 compliments about the service and 100 complaints.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 23 23

Figure 12: Breakdown of all 5,213 waste contacts received 2013/14

4.6.3 Customer Impact and Equality

An Equality Impact Assessment for this service concludes that services are generally accessible to people regardless of age, gender, disability, race and faith or sexuality.

After a survey in 2007, a recommendation was made to include low-level compactors at all sites for green waste and non-recyclable waste (waste to

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 24 24 landfill), and this has been achieved at 18 of Norfolk’s sites. Mile Cross (Norwich) operates an ‘over-the-wall’ style system and the site in Thetford is split level, meaning there are no steps to access bins and therefore there is no requirement for low level compactors.

Recycling Centre contract delivery requires all staff at all sites to be regularly trained in customer service and upon request will provide assistance to those that may require it. Both NEWS and FCC Environment have carried out equality and diversity training, whether through attendance at a course, via a ‘tool-box’ talk or as part of information given to new starters.

Alternative provisions to recycling centres do exist for those who find access difficult, including kerbside collection of residual and recyclable waste and district council bulky waste collections.

4.7 Cost of the Existing Service

Costs to the service have been reduced by around £2 million pounds following a new service level agreement with open-booking accounting in 2014 for the running of 19 of the sites, along with savings from changes to acceptance of paint and tyres and the re-negotiation of the Mile Cross contract. The recycling centre service costs approximately £5 million pounds per annum.

The cost of the service is split with approximately 40% spent on site staff labour, 20% on transport, 20% on direct site costs and 20% spent on indirect costs (e.g. admin and contract management).

In 2014/15, the average service cost per tonne of waste was £128.56, compared to £147.44 the previous year (note these figures exclude lease costs but include business rates). The average cost per visit in 2014/15 was £6.13compared with £6.85/visit the previous year.

The most expensive sites to operate is Docking at £229.65/ tonne. The lowest cost to operate is King’s Lynn at £90.65/tonne. The highest cost per visit is at Wymondham (£11.11/visit) compared with King’s Lynn at £3.81/visit.

Generally, the part time sites have higher cost/ tonne and cost/ visit than the main Plus recycling centres. Smaller sites have similar fixed costs in terms of staffing, rent and rate payments but have a much lower tonnage of material running through them.

In addition to the revenue costs for the operation of the sites, there is a requirement to maintain the site infrastructure and carry out repairs from time to time including repairing the hardstanding and upgrading welfare and drainage facilities.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 25 25 4.8 Infrastructure

Norfolk has twenty sites, of which the County Council lease 8. Eleven of the sites are on land owned by the County Council and Norwich’s Mile Cross site is leased by the contractor from Norwich City Council.

The sites all have permits issued by the Environment Agency and planning consent to operate as recycling centres. The permits and planning consents stipulate limits as to the amount of waste each site is allowed to handle. This is detailed in the table 7.

Table 7: Summary of Sites - tonnage and lease Site Tonnages Lease Max. Tonnage Tonnage throughput 2013/14 Ashill 5,000 1,983 Owned by NCC. Bergh Apton 5,000 1,573 Owned by NCC. Caister 75,000 (planning 5,881 Owned by NCC. limit 6,000 tonnes) Dereham 75,000 (planning 3,453 Lease due to expire 2036 limit 5,500 tonnes) Docking 5,000 701 Owned by NCC.

Heacham 5,000 1,951 Lease due to expire 2021

Hempton 5,000 2,388 Lease due to expire 2034

Ketteringham 5,000 3,188 Owned by NCC.

King’s Lynn 25,000 (planning 6,260 Lease due to expire 2034 limit 8,000 tonnes) Mayton Wood 25,000 (planning 3,481 Owned by NCC. limit 5,000 tonnes) Mile Cross 75,000 14,027 Contract expires 2021 Morningthorpe 5,000 2,218 Lease due to expire 2026 Sheringham 5,000 3,142 Owned by NCC. Snetterton 4,500 1,528 Owned by NCC. Strumpshaw 5,000 2,776 Owned by NCC. Thetford 75,000 (planning 3,912 Lease due to expire 2052 limit 5,500 tonnes) (can be broken after 2032 with 12 months notice) Wells 4,500 914 Lease due to expire 2031 Wereham 5,000 1,924 Owned by NCC, provided under an inter-departmental licence, due to expire 2017. Worstead 5,000 3,162 Lease due to expire 2019 Wymondham 5,000 1,428 Owned by NCC.

Within the next ten years, the leases on three recycling centres are set to expire (Worstead, Mile Cross and Heacham). It is expected that leases will be renewed where required. The search for a new site to replace Norwich’s Mile Cross site was agreed by the Waste Advisory Group in March 2015. The site is leased by the operator FCC Environment from Norwich City Council and provided to the County Council through a design-build-operate contract, which

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 26 26 expires in September 2021 and cannot be further extended. It is currently expected that FCC will wish to continue operating a commercial transfer station from the site beyond the term of the contract for the recycling centre.

A programme of improvement works has been carried out across the sites to ensure that they offer appropriate welfare facilities. Drainage has been improved to ensure it is compliant with the Environmental Permit on all sites. A programme of repairs to hardstandings will be undertaken as required.

4.9 Agreed Changes to the Service

Norfolk County Council carried out a consultation, Norfolk: Putting People First, as part of a budget saving exercise in 2013. From this, a three year plan of budget savings was agreed by members for 2014-17. In 2014/15, sites ceased to accept liquid paint and a limit and charge on tyres was introduced. Additional changes to the service were agreed including making 5 extra sites part time and introducing a £2/visit charge at 9 sites but these changes were put under review and will not be pursued at the current time. This has resulted in the service needing to make the identified budget savings, totalling around £440,000 per annum in other areas.

5 Alternative Recycling Facilities in Norfolk

Norfolk residents have alternative ways to dispose of rubbish in addition to the recycling centres through a variety of services offered by the city, borough and district councils and through town or parish councils and voluntary groups operating recycling schemes, of which around 400 are registered through Norfolk County Council to receive recycling credits.

5.1 Kerbside Collection

There are seven district councils across Norfolk, all of whom offer a kerbside waste collection service. This offers residents a service to recycle a range of items.

5.1.1 Recycling Revolution

From October 1st 2014, the district councils offered an enhanced kerbside collection which allows residents to recycle the following items:

• Paper and cardboard • Glass bottles and jars • Plastic bottles • Empty aerosols • Plastic pots, tubs and trays • Waxed food and drink cartons • Shredded paper, envelopes, wrapping paper and greetings cards • Aluminium foil and food trays • Food and drinks cans.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 27 27

The new service has been branded as the ‘Recycling Revolution’. Items are sent to the Materials Recycling Facility at to be sorted before being sent for recycling.

5.1.2 Green Waste

Green (garden) waste forms a large portion of all recycled waste and kerbside collection is a factor in the proportion of green waste taken at recycling centres. All Norfolk’s seven City, Borough and District Councils offer a kerbside collection service for green waste, for an annual collection fee.

5.1.3 Bulky Waste

All of the district councils offer a bulky waste service. Householders are able to pay a fee and book a collection for the removal of large household items, such as sofas, televisions and fridges. This service does not include collection of DIY waste or hazardous items. The cost of the service varies, as set out in the table below.

Table 8: Summary of Bulky Waste Collections4 District Cost of Bulky Waste Service Breckland Up to 3 items £30 (additional items £5) Broadland Up to 3 items £24 (additional items (£8) Great Yarmouth 1 item £10, 2-3 items £15, 5-6 items £30 King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Up to 3 items £28 (additional items £8.50) North Norfolk 1-3 items £37, 4-6 items £41.50, 7-9 items £56 (additional items £8.50) Norwich City Prices from £19.30 (1 item), up to £95.37 (10 items) South Norfolk Up to 5 items £27 (additional items £5)

District councils offer other services for a fee including hazardous household waste collection.

Norfolk has an extensive network of charities and second hand shops that also offer furniture collections and outlets for selling donated goods. Some charity shops also accept electrical goods for resale.

There are also opportunities for residents to pass on unwanted items through internet sites, such as Freegle, Gumtree and Facebook before taking items for disposal.

5.2 Master Composters and Community Composting

4 Information obtained from District Council websites, September 2014.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 28 28 The County Council provides the countywide Master Composter Volunteer and Home Composting schemes which have helped establish over 88,000 compost bins across Norfolk, resulting in the diversion of around 13,000 tonnes of green waste per annum (using WRAP methodology). Home composting does not contribute towards recycling performance figures, but has a significant saving on potential costs, saving the County Council between £600,000 and £1.3m per annum.

The County Council supports community composting schemes. Five schemes exist in Norfolk, run by volunteers who collect green waste in the community for composting at a community facility. NCRAS (Norfolk Community Recycling Advisory Service) provide support and financial assistance for community groups looking to set up a community composting scheme.

5.3 Community Recycling Banks

There are around 1000 community recycling banks, such as glass and paper banks across Norfolk. These schemes are supported through Recycling Credits paid by the County Council.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 29 29 6 Pressures on the Recycling Centre Service

The strategy for future recycling centre in Norfolk needs to consider the following pressures:

• Required financial savings; • Fluctuations in levels of waste; • Predicted housing growth; • Site constraints; and • Changes in legislation.

A number of recycling centres are already suffering from increasing pressure including access and location, queuing traffic and increased expectation of recycling and customer service. Some sites are located in isolated rural locations away from population centres and therefore experience low visitor numbers and low tonnage and are proportionately more expensive to operate.

The pressures are outlined below and considered in further detail in section 7: Future Service Provision.

6.1 Required Financial Savings

As detailed in section 4.9, a number of changes to the existing service were agreed by members following a public consultation. This consultation was carried out in response to increasing budget pressure on Norfolk County Council. Whilst some changes were put on hold, the service is still required to find savings in the order of £440,000 per annum.

Whilst the recycling centre service is a statutory obligation on the waste disposal authority, the Council have a duty to operate the service in a way that provides best value. As part of this, the service should be continually reviewed in order to ensure best value is being obtained. This is particularly relevant as the Council will face increasing pressure to reduce costs over the coming years.

A best value authority must make arrangements to secure continuous improvement in the way in which its functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness Local Government Act 1999

When considering future recycling centre strategy, capital and revenue costs must be considered across the service to ensure that best value is obtained in operating the recycling centres.

Recent legislative change through the Local Authorities (Prohibition of Charging Residents to Deposit Household Waste) Order 2015 (SI 2015/973) and the Local Government (Prohibition of Charges at Household Waste Recycling Centres) (England) Order 2015 (SI 2015/619) prevent authorities from charging residents to deposit household waste at a recycling centre. Authorities are asked to consider other options before closure of sites, such

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 30 30 as allowing the community sector to operate them, but there is no obligation for an authority to offer sites to community groups prior to closure.

6.2 Fluctuations in levels of waste

Waste collected at Norfolk’s Recycling Centres has been steadily declining before starting to increase in the last 2 years.

This follows the overall trend of Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW) in Norfolk (including commercial waste collected by the district councils), which dropped year-on-year between 2007/08 and 2011/12 before starting to pick up again:

2007/08 - 409,964 tonnes 2008/09 - 401,546 tonnes 2009/10 - 395,249 tonnes 2010/11 - 395,104 tonnes 2011/12 - 389,350 tonnes 2012/13 - 391,053 tonnes 2013/14 - 396,970 tonnes

It is thought the recession had some impact on levels of waste in Norfolk declining and therefore economic recovery and return in house-building should see levels of LACW continue to rise. Levels of LACW appear to link to housing levels and therefore, predicted housing growth is used in this strategy as a likely indicator of levels of waste expected at recycling centres.

6.3 Predicted Housing Growth

Each district in Norfolk is forecasting housing growth in their infrastructure plans by 2026. The highest increase is expected in Breckland, forecasting almost 35% increase in housing and the lowest is in Great Yarmouth at just over 10%. Table 9 provides a summary of existing and forecasted population data taken from the 2011 census and district plans.

Table 9: Summary of Projected Housing Growth by District % Population No. Projected increase (2011 No. Population Households Housing in District Census) Sites Per Site (2011) Growth housing Breckland 130491 4 32623 54519 19000 34.9 Broadland 124646 2 62323 53336 12704 23.8 Great Yarmouth 97277 1 97277 42079 5700 10.7 King’s Lynn and West Norfolk 147451 4 36863 62977 7105 11.3 North Norfolk 101499 4 25375 46046 8000 17.4 Norwich 132512 1 132512 60319 8592 14.2 South Norfolk 124012 4 31003 52809 15524 29.4

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 31 31 Housing growth is largely planned around towns but some rural housing is also planned. Figure 13 shows the distribution of housing growth across the County.

Figure 13: Strategic Housing Sites, Source: Norfolk Compendium of Local Plans 2014

The growth will impact some recycling centres through increased visitor numbers and associated visitor traffic numbers and a potential increase in waste throughput requiring additional site servicing. The sites likely to be most affected by housing growth are:

• Mayton Wood – may experience housing growth of around 42% due to forecast growth in and / . • Snetterton – is expected to expand by around 4,000 homes and postcode surveys show residents of Attleborough largely use the Snetterton site, which could add an additional 48% to the housing in the catchment area. • Thetford is anticipating an additional 6535 homes, representing an increase of around 31% for the catchment area of the recycling centre. Thetford had a new site constructed in 2012, with spare capacity to deal with the additional housing growth. • Wymondham is expecting growth in housing of around 28%. As a small site with a restricted access road this may cause operational difficulties. It is known from postcode surveys that some Wymondham residents choose to use Ketteringham instead and therefore the Wymondham site may not experience an increase in use consistent with the housing growth.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 32 32 It is difficult to predict which sites residents of new housing developments will use as the 2010 postcode surveys show that people do not always visit their closest site. Therefore, other sites around areas of high forecast population growth may also be affected. For example, Mile Cross may be impacted by development in Old Catton and Sprowston and equally Mayton Wood may be impacted by development in Norwich. For the purposes of this assessment, it is assumed that residents of a new housing development will visit the closest site (e.g. it is assumed that residents in new development between Old Catton and Sprowston will visit Mayton Wood).

Largely, Norfolk’s existing recycling centres have spare capacity within their planning limits to deal with additional waste from current predicted levels of housing growth. Some sites will be approaching, or slightly exceeding their planning limits including Caister, Mayton Wood and Thetford. Whilst adjustments can be made to accommodate increases in tonnages through the planning system, some sites may struggle with the additional visitor numbers in terms of operations.

A replacement site for Mile Cross in Norwich will be required from 2021 due to the current contractual arrangements coming to an end. A new site would be designed to accommodate future population growth in Norwich.

6.4 Other Major Infrastructure

As a service for Norfolk householders, growth in levels of housing is likely to provide the biggest impact on site infrastructure. There are, however, several planned improvements to Norfolk’s infrastructure that may impact the service through reduced travel time to get to sites. This includes the improvements to the A47 and the Northern Distributor Road (NDR).

The NDR will provide a dual carriageway link from the A47 at Postwick round the North of Norwich to Norwich International Airport. It will improve journey times and bring relief to local communities and the city centre. The route will improve access for residents in North Norwich to use the recycling centre at Strumpshaw as an alternative to Mayton Wood. The NDR also has the potential to improve fuel efficiency and decrease journey times for vehicles servicing Worstead, Mayton Wood and Sheringham as well as for vehicles taking green waste from Ashill and Dereham to Marsham for composting.

There are also planned improvements along the route of the A47 with the intention of reducing travel times. Improvements include extra dualling, junction improvements and the creation of a new river crossing at Great Yarmouth. If improvements are made to the A47 this will improve transport time for servicing the sites and also makes sites more accessible to the public.

6.5 Site Constraints

Norfolk has a variety of sites of different sizes and in different settings. The smallest sites by site area are at Docking (501m2) and Wymondham (656m2)

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 33 33 and the largest sites (new, best practice layouts) are King’s Lynn (4075m2) and Thetford (3994m2). The sites with smaller hardstandings are much more restricted in the service that they can offer. These sites have limited space for additional containers and therefore introducing new material streams, or other schemes such as reuse shops, is not possible without removing containers for other materials.

When considering expansion of the reuse shop network, the next suitable sites for reuse shops would be the busier full time sites, such as Sheringham, Worstead and Strumpshaw. Inclusion of reuse shops on these sites may be achievable through stacking of ISO containers (for example the site hut over the top of the reuse shop), however, there is restricted available space to collect and store items suitable for reuse and there will be limited parking available.

Of the sites that are leased, several leases are coming up for renewal from 2019. It is assumed that leases are likely to be renewed; however, there is a small risk that the lease cannot be renewed and the site will cease to operate. Lease expiry dates are shown in table 6 (page 22).

6.6 Changes in Legislation

As referred to under ‘Required Financial Savings’, two statutory instruments were introduced in April 2015 which prevent local authorities from charging householders to deposit household waste at recycling centres.

There are currently no other changes of legislation known about that will affect the operations of the recycling centres.

New legislation may require the recycling centre strategy to be reviewed and updated.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Infrastructure Strategy 34 34

7 Future Infrastructure Provision

Future infrastructure provision should seek to continue to facilitate improvements in reducing waste sent to landfill. This needs to be achieved within the context of the pressures set out in section 6. The key considerations when reviewing infrastructure provision are set out in table 10.

Table 10: Summary of Options for Future Infrastructure Provision Options Summary

1 No change to the existing Retain all 20 sites. service No opportunity for cost savings through rationalising site provision

2 Review existing service 8.5 mile service standard has been standard running for some time, significant improvements made to kerbside waste collections, public travel habit may have changed – better cars, more willing to travel further.

3 Rationalise and improve Improvements required at some current site provision sites in anticipation of forecast housing growth or due to inadequate size of site.

Appendices B and C provide individual assessments for all 20 recycling centres. The findings are summarised on the following pages.

7.1 Maintain existing Service Provision

Retain existing 20 sites across Norfolk. Current customer satisfaction levels are high at 83% in 2014. ‘Diversion from landfill’ rates are also high, on average they were 74% in 201/15.

Currently 97% of the population are within 8.5 miles of a recycling centre (Friday- Monday), this figures drops to 91% between Tuesday and Thursday when part time sites are closed5.

Existing provision of sites is well within the recommended levels stated by WRAP for sites per population and per household. However, forecast housing growth will put localised pressure on some sites, which do not have the capacity to deal with additional growth without investment in the existing site or relocation of the site. These sites may experience significant queues due to increased site closure for servicing (additional visitor numbers will cause containers to fill up quicker requiring extra servicing) and therefore, satisfaction in the service may decline.

5 Figures calculated based on Experian Mosaic 2013 data using GIS mapping information

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 35

Continued provision of the current network of recycling centres will maintain the existing opportunities for residents to recycle.

Continuation of the existing service limits the options for making improvements to sites and introducing new, larger sites as well as providing little opportunity for significant cost savings.

7.2 Review the Existing 8.5 mile Service Standard

As outlined in section 2.3, the existing 8.5 mile service standard has been in place since 1985. It has been almost 30 years since this standard was agreed and consideration should be given as to whether this is an appropriate limit and whether an alternative catchment based around drive-times instead of mileage would be more appropriate.

The WRAP report offers guidance as to appropriate catchment areas for sites, including by population and distance. More recently, the Governments response to consultation on the recent discussion paper ‘Preventing ‘back-door’ charging at household waste recycling centres’, provided some guidance on suitable level of provision for recycling centres –

‘A number of respondents asked for legislation or guidance on how many household waste recycling centres should be provided. The duty on waste disposal authorities to provide free to use household waste recycling centre facilities specifies they must be “reasonably accessible to persons resident in the area” and the Government believes it is right that this should be a local decision. Local authorities should reach their own conclusions in terms of minimum acceptable levels of household waste recycling centre provision, for example through ‘x minutes’ drive time for the great majority of residents’ or ‘sites per head of population’. Local authorities may also want to consider as part of their decision the local household waste and recycling collection service, and bulky waste collection service, offered to residents by the local authority.’

Norfolk’s current level of service provision is slightly higher than the recommended 7 miles in rural areas but coverage is well within recommendations for number of households per site and population per site.

The benefits of changing the policy on provision to a drive time policy are: • Giving residents a clear idea on how long it will take to travel to a recycling centre; • A sites catchment is based on accessibility through the local road network, rather than ‘as the crow flies’ mileage which may not translate to an appropriate option considering local road constraints; • Follow recommended guidelines provided by WRAP; • Sites located near or on major road networks will be within a reasonable driving distance of a larger catchment of residents; • Encourage future recycling centre development to be well linked to the road network, in line with planning policy and to the benefit of decreasing costs associated with transport of waste.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 36

Norfolk County Council’s GIS team have provided a series of drive time maps. These maps plot estimated journey times from a designated point (a recycling centre). The maps assume drivers can achieve the speed limit except in urban areas, where speeds decrease. The maps are based on theoretical drive times calculated using published data but do not take in to consideration any changes in local driving conditions, such as road works.

Norfolk is a large and rural county. Mapping the service based around drive times shows that the majority of the County is within a 20 minute drive of a Recycling Centre. There are notable areas that do not meet this standard, particularly around Reepham/ as shown on figure 15. Almost all of Norfolk is within 30 minutes of a Recycling Centre (figure 14). It may not be economically practicable for all of the population to be 20 minutes from a recycling centre. In rural areas, 30 minutes is deemed acceptable but it is recommended that where possible, Norfolk strives to meet the 20 minute standard. The current standard means that residents living 8.5 miles from a site could face journey times between around 15 minutes and 35 minutes depending on the road network.

The current network provides good coverage based on the 20 minute drive time (94% of the population is within 20 minutes’ drive of a recycling centre, rising to 99% of the population within 30 minutes’ drive when all 20 sites are open over the weekend, this drops to 90% within 20 minutes and 98% within 30 minutes during the week when part time closures are in operation), so a shift in policy would not require any additional sites. The measure may allow for future redesign of the service to be achieved whilst meeting the 20 minute drive time standard, which would pass a test of reasonableness.

Figure 14: 30 minute drive time from Norfolk's 20 Recycling Centres

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 37

Figure 15: 20 minute drive time from Norfolk's 20 Recycling Centres

An alternative service standard option is to ensure provision of 1 site per district. This is currently the case in the Borough of Great Yarmouth and Norwich City. Other districts have up to 4 within their authority boundary. Provision of sites by district may not result in equitable distribution across the County due to varying shape, size and accessibility of the different districts. Visitors to recycling centres are not constrained by district boundaries; closest sites for residents may cross district boundaries. It is not recommended that provision of recycling centres is based on a defined number of sites per district.

Alternatively, consideration could be given to operating only 2 sites in Norfolk. The provision of recycling centres is a responsibility of the WDA under the EPA 1990, as outlined in section 2. The EPA states that the waste disposal authority must provide ‘for places … at which persons resident in its area may deposit their household waste and for the disposal of waste so deposited’. The term ‘places’ is not defined, however, it is written in the plural suggesting that a WDA should provide a minimum of 2 sites per County. Advice provided to Norfolk County Council from NPLaw is that provision of sites must be based on a test of reasonableness and that for a County as large as Norfolk 2 sites would not be deemed reasonable provision.

Norfolk has a geography that spans a large distance and includes large towns and rural areas. Provision of only 2 sites would mean some residents having to travel large distances to visit the sites. It would result in each of the 2 sites serving a population of around 428,000 residents, around 3 times higher than the recommended number in the NACAS guidelines.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 38

In the event 2 sites could be selected to be the only 2 sites serving Norfolk, for example Norwich and King’s Lynn, these sites would not be able to cope with the existing tonnage being put through Norfolk’s Recycling Centre network. Residents would need to find alternative ways to deal with their waste, such as kerbside and bulky waste collections as well as reducing and reusing and it could provide significant inconvenience to Norfolk residents.

Operating just 2 sites in Norfolk could offer savings of around £2.5 million per annum. The selected sites would be unable to cope with the level of waste they would be expected to receive without significant financial investment and new infrastructure. Whilst this option has the capacity to provide large financial savings, it is not a recommended course of action.

Proposal 1: Change service standard to ‘provide sites within a 20 minute drive of residents, where economically practicable’

7.3 Improvements Required at Existing Sites

If the current network of 20 recycling centres is retained, there are a number of improvements required across several sites in order to ensure that they continue to perform well. These could be considered short or medium term improvements and should be considered within the wider context of longer term improvements, as explore in 7.4.

Improvements to Existing Sites

A Best Value Action Plan for the recycling centre service was written by Norfolk County Council and contractor, NEWS, in 2014 to put forward ideas for improvements to the service to ensure it continued to operate efficiently and offer best value to Norfolk. Suggestions, which are being taken forward, included:

• Extension of the King’s Lynn Reuse Shop – space has become available for an extension to the reuse shop to allow for extended range of items for sale, including bulky furniture and electrical items. • Installation of PV panels – solar panels were installed at Thetford and Bergh Apton Recycling Centres linked to planning consents granted. Installation of panels at small sites is not financially viable however, panels will be installed at sites with canopies (Dereham and King’s Lynn) subject to landlords consent.

Restricted space for Additional Materials and Reuse

The recycling centre network must continue to seek to drive down the waste being sent to landfill, in accordance with the Norfolk County Council’s Principles of Waste (section 3). The existing network is under some pressure as in order to extract more materials from landfill, additional recycling and reuse streams may be required and these are limited by available space at sites.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 39

Addition of reuse shops has the potential to bring in an average income of £15,000 per site per year (based on existing reuse shops) and in addition there is a financial benefit through avoided disposal costs. Every tonne of waste going through the reuse shops and not being sent for disposal saves the authority around £116/tonne6. Expansion of the reuse network would be subject to a detailed business case.

Current full time sites without reuse facilities are Sheringham, Worstead, Strumpshaw, Morningthorpe, Ashill and Heacham. Sheringham and Worstead are the 2 busiest full time sites after the Plus sites in terms of visitor numbers and tonnage throughput. Morningthorpe, Worstead and Sheringham serve the 7th, 8th and 9th largest catchments (by population) following 6 of the Plus sites but are some of the County’s smallest sites. Space is limited particularly at Morningthorpe, Worstead and Sheringham and it would be difficult to expand the materials at these sites or add in a reuse shop.

Proposals are being developed to explore the option of double stacking a reuse shop with the site office to provide an opportunity to have a reuse shop on a site with limited space. Additional traffic from reuse shops needs to be considered, particularly on these sites where space is limited and the site needs to close for servicing which can cause queues to develop. It is generally thought that visitors to the reuse shop would already have been visiting the recycling centre and not making a specific trip to the reuse shop, however, regard must be given for sites with limited parking spaces.

Infrastructure development at Morningthorpe, Worstead and Sheringham would be limited due to the sites being very small. In order to address this issue and allow these sites to have the same opportunities to promote good recycling and reuse as Main Plus sites, they could have small scale redevelopment (e.g. a new reuse and office facility) or relocated to an alternative, larger facility. Morningthorpe and Worstead have leases due to expire in 2026 and 2019 respectively, Sheringham is on land owned by the County Council.

Worstead is covered by the catchment area for Mayton Wood (16 minute drive), which provides a reuse shop and Morningthorpe is covered by the catchment area for Ketteringham (16 minute drive). If no option for redevelopment or relocation is available, residents in these areas could utilise the existing reuse network at the closest Plus site. Sheringham sits outside of the catchment for either Mayton Wood or Hempton and there would be a reasonable distance for residents in this area to travel for access to a reuse shop. It is therefore proposed that Sheringham should be developed to include a reuse shop, or relocated should land and funding become available for an improved, larger site, subject to a full business case.

Development of full time sites to allow them to offer the same services as ‘Plus’ sites would also make Pay as You Throw DIY service more widely available and other current and potential future additional services, such as tyre disposal and trade waste service.

6 £116/tonne is an average of disposal costs for waste to landfill across Norfolk. Cost of disposal through the recycling centre network varies by material, disposal method and end destination.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 40

Additional issues have been raised regarding staff parking at Sheringham Recycling Centre with a number of incidents of staff cars being damaged. The small size of the site leads to members of the public parking outside of the site and walking waste in and this can cause congestion for manoeuvring cars outside of the site entrance. There is no additional space at the site to create a dedicated staff parking area. Many other recycling centres do not have staff parking areas but staff at Sheringham have highlighted a particular problem at their site.

Proposal 2:– Redevelopment or relocation of Sheringham Recycling Centre to allow it to operate as a Main Plus site subject to a full business case.

Improvements Required to Address Population Growth

Section 6 provides information surrounding forecast housing growth in Norfolk over the next ten years. Particular pressure points identified are along the A11 corridor, with growth expected at Attleborough and Wymondham affecting the recycling centres at Snetterton, Wymondham and Ketteringham and large growth expected to the North of Norwich with the potential to impact the site at Mayton Wood.

Mayton Wood will be impacted by around 10,000 new homes due to be constructed to the North of Norwich. Additionally, it may be impacted by the relocation of a site for Norwich as the location of the site may either encourage more people from North Norwich to visit Mayton Wood, or if the site is located to the North of Norwich it may have the reverse effect and attract residents that might otherwise have used Mayton Wood. The existing site would be unable to cope with the forecast increase in visitor numbers without causing significant disruption to the public through site closures due to increased bin movements. The existing access road is single track with passing bays and increased queuing is likely to cause further impact on this road.

Work was carried out in 2014 at Mayton Wood to improve the drainage and the safety of the site through provision of a new fence line. As part of this, the site was improved through resurfacing the upper yard making it more accessible. Further scope to improve the site is limited with the site being surrounded by a closed landfill (with active gas and leachate management) on 2 sides and access being required to the closed landfill and neighbouring quarry through the road immediately adjacent to the fence line.

Mayton Wood Recycling Centre dealt with 3,841 tonnes of waste in 2013/14 and has planning permission to take up to 5,000 tonnes. It currently has the fourth largest catchment (8.5 mile radius) by population size. In 2014/15, the site had an operating cost per tonne of £91.43 (including residual waste disposal) making it one of the County’s most economical sites. Replacement of Mayton Wood with a new best practice facility would allow the site to deal with a larger volume of waste and include improved reuse facility, with the potential of increasing income through reuse for the County Council.

Relocation of Mayton Wood to the Aylsham area would provide a better level of service coverage for Norfolk filling in an existing gap in service between Aylsham and Reepham.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 41

Closure of Mayton Wood Recycling Centre and replacement with a new site is unlikely to provide significant financial saving to cover the required capital investment unless a new site is developed in a location that allows a second site to be closed. The capital investment required to build a new fit for purpose site would be around £3million. Replacement of 1 site would not provide a financial benefit to Norfolk County Council, and therefore the service in this part of Norfolk should be considered more widely. A full business case would need to be provided for the development or relocation of Mayton Wood.

Whilst there is little financial benefit in replacing just one site, the existing site will not be able to accommodate the forecast population growth in the area and therefore redevelopment is likely to be required. It is recommended that a new site is found to replace the existing site at Mayton Wood.

Proposal 3: Relocate Mayton Wood Recycling Centre subject to a full business case.

Attleborough is forecast an additional 4,000 homes. The 2010 postcode surveys show that around 86% of recycling centre users from Attleborough went to Snetterton, 11% to Wymondham and 3% to Ketteringham. Snetterton is a part time site so residents living in Attleborough have the option to travel to Ketteringham or Thetford during the week. Alternatively, if the site becomes too busy to cope in the current opening hours there may be an option for the site to reconsider the opening hours of the site if necessary. Provision of sites along the A11 corridor is considered in greater detail in Section 7.4.

Norwich is expecting housing growth of around 14% but could be impacted by additional development in the Greater Norwich area. The existing Mile Cross site already experiences frequent queuing at peak periods. The current contract is due to expire in 2021 and a new site will be required after this period.

The existing site is the busiest site in Norfolk with the highest visitor numbers and highest throughput of waste but has the lowest recycling rate. The site takes around 14,000 tonnes of waste compared with 6,200 tonnes at King’s Lynn and of this 52% is recycled (2014/15) compared to the average across all of Norfolk’s recycling centres of 64% (the highest performing site is Snetterton at 78%). The 2013 traffic surveys showed Mile Cross received 841 visitors on a Sunday in September (summer opening hours), compared to 558 at the second busiest site, King’s Lynn.

Assuming the tonnage throughput of waste at Mile Cross recycling centre grows at the same rate as the housing, it could expect to be taking around 16,000 tonnes per annum by 2026 (this does not consider fluctuations in waste generation or other factors that may influence waste disposal). The life of a new facility is usually planned for 25 years and therefore it can be expected that there will be additional population growth beyond that already forecast. Provision of a site beyond this must have sufficient capacity for future growth in the area.

A report was sent to Norfolk County Council’s Waste Advisory Group in March 2015 detailing the future options for provision of a recycling centre in Norwich beyond 2021. It was agreed that the search for a new site should commence.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 42

7.4 Redesign of the Recycling Centre Network

Norfolk currently has good coverage of recycling centres across the County and has low population per site figures compared to the recommended levels and in comparison with other authorities (see section 4.3). On both the existing 8.5 mile radius service standard and the proposed 20 minute drive time service standard, there are some areas of the County where there is an overprovision of sites with some sites covering the same catchment areas.

Areas of overprovision mean that sites generally operate with low tonnage throughput and, as a result, have a higher cost/ tonne because whilst the fixed costs remain the same (rates and staffing) the volume of waste running through is very low so the cost per tonne of waste is high. Reviewing areas of over provision offers the opportunity for the Norfolk County Council to make financial savings, largely through staffing reductions.

Under the existing 8.5 mile catchment, there is significant overlap in provision of sites. Following the suggested change to a 20 minute drive-time, there are the same areas of overprovision plus some additional areas (see Figure 15, page 40). The key areas identified where there is an apparent over provision are:

• the A11 corridor (Ketteringham, Wymondham, Snetterton); • North West Norfolk (Docking, Heacham, Hempton and Wells); and • South Norfolk (Morningthorpe and Bergh Apton).

These areas of over provision are in contrast to some noticeable gaps in service provision around Reepham, Diss and .

A11 Corridor

Along the A11 between Norwich and Thetford, there are 4 sites over a distance of around 22 miles – Ketteringham, Wymondham, Snetterton and Thetford (figure 16 shows the coverage of areas within 20 minute drive of a recycling centre along the A11 corridor). Ketteringham and Thetford are at either end of Norfolk’s stretch of the A11 and are both Main Plus sites with part time sites at Wymondham and Snetterton sitting between. There is a significant overlap in the catchment areas of Ketteringham and Wymondham Recycling Centre, which are also covered in parts by the catchment areas of Mile Cross, Morningthorpe and Dereham Recycling Centres. A comparison of the catchment areas of Wymondham and Ketteringham is show in figure 17.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 43

Figure 16: Recycling Centre Catchment Areas along the A11 Corridor (20 minute drive)

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 44

Figure 17: Comparison of 20 minute drive time catchment for Ketteringham (top) and Wymondham (bottom), green shows 5-10 minutes, yellow 10-20 minutes, peach, 20-30 minutes

There are several options for rationalisation of service provision in this area, including an option to replace several sites with one new Plus site as outlined below:

1. Current provision is maintained – no opportunity to make financial savings or infrastructure improvement, however, no disruption to the existing service provision and no requirement for capital expenditure. The total capacity along the A11 is sufficient to accommodate forecast growth although the closest site to new houses may not have sufficient capacity on its own (e.g. Wymondham cannot accommodate housing growth but Wymondham and Ketteringham together could). 2. Closure of Snetterton, Wymondham and Ketteringham and open a new Plus site at either Wymondham or Attleborough. This would requires significant capital investment (around £3million) and an appropriate area of land, however, could offer improved service and savings of around £100,000pa7 (excluding costs associated with capital investment). This is the preferred option which allows improvements for residents utilising the sites along the A11 through provision of a best practice site with reuse in replacement of the current sites. 3. Closure of Wymondham, no new infrastructure. Surrounding sites could accommodate current waste levels but will struggle with predicted population growth. Offers savings of around £95,000 pa but this approach is not recommended due to lack of capacity for future growth at the existing sites. 4. Closure of Wymondham and Ketteringham and open a new replacement site at Wymondham, requires capital investment but the operational costs would be neutral. This approach is not favoured over option 2 (with additional closure of Snetterton) as it is unlikely to deliver any financial benefit for Norfolk County Council.

7 Based on service cost only (excluding waste disposal and transport costs), total service cost for Ketteringham, Wymondham and Snetterton approximately £335,000 compared to Thetford (example Plus Site) at £225,000. Savings come from staffing costs, materials costs, supplies and services and other direct costs.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 45

The construction of a new site would require appropriate land and funding, should this become available it is recommended that a new site is developed.

Proposal 4: Replacement site for Wymondham, Ketteringham and Snetterton along the A11

North West Norfolk As shown in section 2, tables 4 and 6, the 2 quietest sites (by visitor number and tonnage) are located at Wells-next-the-Sea and Docking. Docking consistently receives both the lowest tonnage and visitor numbers and in 2013/14 Wells had the second lowest tonnage. Equally, Docking and Wells have high costs per tonne of waste (£229.65/tonne and £200.93/tonne respectively) and the high costs per visit (£10.57 and £8.43 respectively).

Residents in this area of Norfolk are served by Hempton Main Plus Recycling Centre, offering the full range of services including Pay as You Throw service and reuse shop. Hempton has the lowest tonnage and visitor numbers of the Plus sites and were a decision made to close either Docking or Wells, the additional visitors directed to Hempton are likely to improve the efficiency of the site by pushing additional tonnage through Hempton and reducing haulage costs. Figure 18 shows the catchment area of Hempton Recycling Centre on a drive-time basis, demonstrating that both Wells and Docking are within 20 minutes of the site.

Closure of Wells would result in a gap in small gap service standard with an area between Blakeney and being more than 20 minutes from either Sheringham or Hempton (note that the area would be within 30 minutes’ drive of a site) whereas closure of Docking would not cause a drop in coverage under the service standard (either 8.5 miles or 20 minutes’ drive time).

Residents currently utilising the Docking site have a number of alternative options were the site to close. Hempton Recycling Centre is approximately 12 miles (by road) from Docking, a journey of around 18 minutes. Heacham Recycling Centre is 5.8 miles, around 10 minutes journey time, from Docking along the B454. Sheringham, King’s Lynn and Dereham Recycling Centres sit on the periphery of this area.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 46

Figure 18: Drive time catchment for Hempton Recycling Centre

Closure of Docking Recycling Centre would result in around 700 tonnes of waste per year requiring disposal of at an alternative facility. All sites in the vicinity have the capacity to deal with this within their permitted throughput. Forecast housing growth around Docking is low, at less than 1% and therefore this will not add additional future pressure to other sites in that area.

Closure of either Docking or Wells would offer a financial saving to the authority and would improve the efficiency of the alternative sites, e.g. Hempton. Closure of Docking could save around £70,000 per year. Given the gap in service coverage from closure at Wells, it is recommended that Docking Recycling Centre is closed and residents use alternative facilities within a 20 minute drive at either Hempton or Heacham. If a 30 minute drive time for some residents is deemed acceptable, the additional closure of Wells could save a further £80,000 and surrounding sites would have capacity to absorb the additional tonnage.

Proposal 5: Closure of Docking Recycling Centre

South Norfolk

Figure 19 shows a high density of sites to the south east of Norwich, including Strumpshaw, Bergh Apton, Morningthorpe and the A11 corridor. The A11 corridor has been considered separately.

Strumpshaw and Bergh Apton are 5 miles apart as the crow flies and under the current 8.5 mile service standard, they have overlapping catchment areas. Due to the presence of travel between the two is not direct as there is no river crossing. Strumpshaw and Bergh Apton sit within a 30 minute drive time of each other and both sites are within 20 minutes of Mile Cross Recycling Centre, Norwich.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 47

Figure 19: Recycling Centre coverage to the south-east of Norwich

Bergh Apton serves residents along the A146 corridor and is the only site along this stretch of road between Norwich and the Suffolk border. It serves a catchment population of around 30,000 residents and operates with a cost of around £123/ tonne or £7.61 per visit. There is little housing growth forecast in the area and its tonnage throughput could be accommodated at other neighbouring sites, such as Morningthorpe, Strumpshaw or Norwich. Much of Bergh Apton’s catchment area is covered by alternative sites with residents being 20 minutes from Morningthorpe or Mile Cross and a small area from Loddon to the Suffolk border being 30 minutes from Morningthorpe as shown on figures 20 and 21.

The requirement for a new site for Norwich (discussed in section 7.4) may impact further on the future of Bergh Apton. Closure of Bergh Apton recycling Centre would offer an annual saving of around £70,000.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 48

Figure 20: Mile Cross Recycling Centre catchment, yellow area shows 20 minute drive time, peach area 30 minute drive time

Figure 21: Morningthorpe recycling centre catchment areas showing drive times of 5 minutes (dark green), 5-10 minutes (light green), 10-20 minutes yellow and 20-30 minutes in peach

Morningthorpe Recycling Centre serves towns and villages along the A140 corridor. Morningthorpe Recycling Centre costs around £136.23 per tonne (including residual waste disposal) to operate, or £6.72 per visit, with a tonnage throughput in 2013/14 of 2,218. Residents close to Suffolk border, such as around Diss, are within 20 minutes of the recycling centre at Morningthorpe and within 30 minutes of the site at Thetford. Closure of Morningthorpe Recycling Centre would leave a gap in service provision along the A140 corridor between Diss and both with the existing and proposed service standard. With housing growth anticipate around Long Stratton, it is not recommended that Morningthorpe Recycling Centre is closed.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 49

Strumpshaw is geographically separated from the sites at Bergh Apton and Morningthorpe due to the River Yare and drive travel between the sites must utilise the A47. The closest alternative sites are a minimum of 25 minutes’ drive away (Mile Cross, Bergh Apton or Caister). Strumpshaw has a higher tonnage throughput than either Bergh Apton or Morningthorpe. It is not recommended that this site is closed at this time due to the time taken to travel to alternative sites.

Closure of either Strumpshaw or Morningthorpe would leave gaps in service provision under the both the existing service standard and the proposed drive-time standard. The potential relocation of a site in Norwich may impact sites in this area and provision should be reviewed once a new site for Norwich has been confirmed.

Proposal 6: Closure of Bergh Apton Recycling Centre

Further Potential Closures

The recycling centre network could be further rationalised beyond the key areas highlighted above. The drive time mapping demonstrates that Norfolk currently has excellent provision of sites but that with a lot fewer sites, coverage could still be achieved leaving the majority of residents just a 20 minutes’ drive from a recycling centre, in line with recommended service coverage as discussed in section 4.3.

91% of Norfolk’s residents could be within 20 minutes of a recycling centre if the County operated with 13 sites, these being the 8 current Main Plus sites with the addition of Wereham, Morningthorpe, Worstead, Heacham and Sheringham (see Figure 22), rising to 99% within 30 minutes. This is an improvement in coverage compared to the current weekday coverage when part time sites are closed (89% within 20 minutes). In this scenario, the sites could accommodate the existing volumes of waste currently passing through all 20 sites and should have sufficient capacity within their planning permissions to accommodate the expected levels following housing growth.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 50

Figure 22: Scenario of 13 recycling centres with drive time catchments (brown - up to 20 minutes, green - up to 30 minutes)

Were the County to operate with 13 recycling centres, it would still meet the WRAP guidance with respect to maximum number of inhabitants per recycling centre (average of 65,991 per recycling centre) and maximum number of households per recycling centre (average of 28,621 households per site). Additionally, those residents not within the 20 minute drive time standard would fall under a 30 minute drive, which is still acceptable for rural areas under the WRAP guidance. Closure of the other 7 recycling centres would have the potential to save the County Council in the region of £700,000 per year.

Wereham would be the only remaining part time site and it is suggested that under this scenario this returns to operate on a full time basis. All sites should offer on-site reuse facilities where space allows.

Under this scenario some sites would still need to be further developed or moved to a new location, including Norwich, Mayton Wood, Ketteringham (replacing Wymondham, Snetterton and Ketteringham) and Sheringham due to site specific pressures. This would provide the opportunity to position sites strategically, linking them with centres of population and road networks reducing travel time for residents and improving servicing of the sites subject to available land and funding. This would require a capital investment in the order of £12 million if 4 new sites were to be provided.

Proposal 7: Reduce Recycling Centre network to operate Main Plus sites and Sheringham, Wereham, Worstead, Heacham and Morningthorpe only

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 51

Significant financial savings (around £1.4million) could be made through operating the service utilising seven main plus sites only. The seven sites would use existing next facilities at Dereham, Thetford, King’s Lynn and Caister plus the new Norwich facility (location to be determined), a new facility to replace Mayton Wood and the existing site at Hempton. This option does not require much additional capital investment to that already required (the need for a new site for Norwich has already been identified alongside the need for Mayton Wood to be upgraded due to significant forecast housing growth).

Under the model of operating 7 sites, it would mean each site serving a population of around 122,555. 76% of the population would be within a 20 minute drive, and 96% within a 30 minute drive. Coverage could be improved dependant on the final location of a new Norwich site and a new site to replace Mayton Wood. The tonnage currently going through the other 13 sites would migrate to the remaining 7 requiring significant changes to current servicing regimes as well as an amendment to planning consents.

Proposal 8: Operate a reduced network of 7 recycling centres

8 Conclusion and Recommendations

Norfolk’s recycling centre network needs to respond to a number of changes and pressures anticipated in the coming years including furthering recycling and reuse, forecast housing growth and increasing need to make financial savings. There are a number of scenarios that can be implemented to address the pressures on the service whilst offering the opportunity for Norfolk residents to have continued access to the recycling and reuse services available at recycling centres.

Proposal 1: Change service standard to ‘provide sites within a 20 minute drive of residents, where economically practicable’

Development of the Existing Network: Proposal 2: Redevelop or relocation of Sheringham Recycling Centre to allow it to operate as a Main Plus site subject to a full business case.

Proposal 3: Relocate Mayton Wood Recycling Centre subject to a full business case.

Redesign of the Recycling Centre Network Proposal 4: Replacement site for Wymondham, Ketteringham and Snetterton along the A11 (potential saving £100k pa)

Proposal 5: Closure of Docking Recycling Centre (potential saving £70k pa)

Proposal 6: Closure of Bergh Apton Recycling Centre (potential saving £70k pa)

Further savings: Proposal 7: Operate a reduced network of 13 recycling centres (potential saving £700k)

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 52

Proposal 8: Operate a reduced network of 7 recycling centres (potential saving £1.4million)

A number of alternative disposal options exist for Norfolk residents including the kerbside and bulky waste collections operated by the district council, local banks (e.g. glass and textiles), home composting and private waste contractors such as skip hire. Rationalisation of the recycling centre network offers the opportunity for the County Council to make financial savings whilst still offering a comprehensive service accessible to Norfolk residents.

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 53

Appendices:

A. Recycling Centre Opening Times

The majority of Norfolk’s recycling centres are open seven days a week, closing only on Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Year’s Day.

Part time Recycling Centres The following sites operate part time opening hours: • Bergh Apton • Docking • Snetterton • Wells • Wereham • Wymondham

These sites will be open from Fridays to Mondays and will be closed Tuesdays to Thursdays inclusive. They will operate summer and winter opening times as shown below.

Opening times All recycling centres, except Mile Cross are open as follows:

April to September: 8.00am to 6.00pm October to March: 8.00am to 4.00pm

Mile Cross opening times: January to February: 8.00am to 4.00pm March: 8.00am to 6.00pm April to August: 8.00am to 8.00pm September: 8.00am to 7.00pm October to end BST: 8.00am to 6.00pm End BST to December: 8.00am to 4.00pm

(BST=British Summer Time)

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 54

B. Statistics by Site

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 55

C. Site Summary

A 41 page document, available on request

Appendix M – Recycling Centre Strategy 56