2014-07-22 Infrastructure & Services Committee Agenda

INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                   22 JULY 2014


2. The disposal of 1,186 tonnes of waste at the landfill consumed an estimated volume of 1,395
   cubic metres of landfill space valued at $171,970. This cost was not included in the waste
   disposal modelling.

3. Under the contractual arrangements it was not viable for the Contractor to provide a separate
   truck for the collection of E-waste. A large volume of E-waste was compacted and taken to
   landfill rather than being recycled.

4. There were 44 calls for assistance in regard to requests for collection of prohibited material
   that was claimed to be placed in front of premises by persons unknown. These calls resulted
   in the separate collection of 65 mattresses and 90 tyres and also many batteries and gas
   bottles. Subsequent to mattresses and tyres not being collected, many were then dumped in
   the bushland.

5. Council operational staff then had to collect these dumped items.

6. As Council pays a fee for the deconstruction of mattresses and a fee for the disposal of tyres
   rather than landfilling these items, the collection of these prohibited items added to the overall
   cost of the collection program. Mattresses do not easily fit into the compaction vehicle and
   do not compact well. They create major collection delays through more frequent trips to
   landfill. Council has never collected mattresses in previous years for this reason.

7. Weighbridge staff at the Eumundi Road landfill and at the rural transfer stations reported an
   observed reduction in delivery of self-hauled waste in the month leading up to and during the
   collection service.

8. Complaints were received from the public during the collection period, mostly related to
   delays in collecting the bulk waste material. This was unavoidable due to the unprecedented
   volume of material presented and the resources available to the contractor.

9. A few complaints were also received in regard to poor aesthetics related to waste stored on
   the kerbside in high profile areas, particularly during the Noosa Food & Wine Festival,
   ANZAC Day and the Noosa Ultimate Sports Event.

10. The Salvation Army and Briteside industries reported a large reduction in the delivery of
    useful items for re-sale during the period prior to and during the bulk waste collection
    program. Residents apparently prefer to use the convenience of the bulk waste collection
    service in preference to the inconvenience of delivery of items to not for profit organisation
    during the year.

11. Drive by inspections by staff indicated that some of the material placed out during the
    collection was of good quality and suitable for reuse. These products could have been re-sold
    through not for profit organisations. This was most evident in the more affluent areas of the
    Shire where good quality products were placed out for collection. Where not recycled by
    members of the community, this material was compacted in the compactor truck and
    disposed to land fill. It was not possible for not for profit organisations to collect the goods
    during the collection period due to lack of storage space and the cost of driving to collect
    these items from the kerbside.

12. Some Sunshine Coast Council residents were observed dumping items in Noosa Shire at
    Peregian Beach and Doonan. This caused dismay to some Noosa residents who discovered
    piles of material on adjacent land or in front of their residence.

13. There was some confusion regarding the exact dates of the pick-up services around
    Tewantin and Noosaville.


                                                                                      Page 46 of 49