[Andrew Butcher]

Ok, so hear’s the deal. We offer 4 free kerbside clean-ups for all parcels of rateable land that pay the annual DWM charge ($330), ie have the usual 3 bin service (Waste, Recycle & Green). We are now seeing growth in high-rise that under our planning instrument can (with approval) instal there own waste management system that is outside the scope of our DWM contract. In a recent case compacted waste is outputted into cotainers our contractor either cannot access or cannot pick-up.

I have advised our Waste Services Section that this not a problem beacuase we change them the availability charge of $30 per rateable parcel as we have a statutory responsibility to ensure proper waste management practices are, and will continue to be performed.

Now they want to provide the free kerb side to these properties that in essence are not paying for it and was wondering if anyone else had come accross this issue and if so how you deal with it.

Thank you.

Regards, Andrew

[Suzi Flynn]

Hi Andrew,

I haven’t had that issue exactly but a few years back when serviced apartments became residential, many of those buildings already had waste contracts in place. So to handle the issue of the City not supplying the normal full waste service but still offering partial services like the white goods pickups, we introduced a new lower charge.

I don’t think you should provide a partial service for the $30 availability charge because the kerbside clean-ups are not really are they. The costs will be inbuilt into the existing charges. Unless and until a new charge is introduced, I would suggest they need to pay the minimum waste charge (after the availability charge) to obtain any part of the service.

Suzi

[John Towers]

Drew,

I agree with Suzi although I would suggest that allowing residential buildings to install their own waste management system is fraught with danger going forward.

As a ratepayer I would be concerned that this type of charging regime would create a system of haves & have nots.

What is to stop an individual ratepayer entering into an agreement with a private supplier for collection, eg fortnightly, thereby saving themselves money? I’m not aware that there is any ‘allowance’ available with =in the LGA & from memory (although it is fading) the intention of the availability charge was only to cover vacant land. It was never intended to cover this type of situation.

JT

[Andrew Butcher]

Suzy and John,
Thank you for your posts. I have done a bit of reserch into this and since met with our Waste Services Manager and agreed on the following outcomes.
1. In future all DA’s assessed by him will need to have a waste service that our contractor can service.
2. We are going to work on fee for kerbside collections and maybe even a policy for these developments. It will include things such as where and when items are to be stored (ie not actually on the kerb) and reasonably represent the cost in collection and disposal.
3.Continue to allow people to register on-line for a “kerbside” clean-up.
Hopefully this will fix the problem, but typically they raise this after fees and charges have been done.
I fully agree with you both and have some real concerns about separate arrangements, he has agreed not to enter into any more of these (only one so far), we will see.
Thanks again,
Andrew

[John Towers]

Drew

Just a comment about future DA’s, many are not even approved by Council these days. We have a problem DWM development which was approved by the L&E Court after being rejected by Council. This has caused us similar issues.

Just something else that we need to be aware of, particularly the recent publicity given to infill development along rail corridors etc.

JT

[Author]

Posts