Contact: Philippa Smart e mail: [email protected] . ext 7336

1 Summary and purpose

1.1 To provide Members with background research about two possible topics for in-depth scrutiny to be included in the Select Committee's work programme for the year 2008/09.

1.2 This report contains background research carried out by the Committee's scrutiny officer on the subjects of:

a) road infrastructure, in relation to population increase

b) waste management, in relation to where real progress can be made next

1.3 The two topics of waste and road infrastructure were identified by Members at their meeting in April 2008, from a wider list of possible scrutiny topics. In order to assist Members in their work programme planning, background information was requested, to support a decision at the July Committee meeting as to which of the two subjects the Committee would wish to be reviewed in the coming year.

2 Conclusion and recommendation

2.1 Members may wish to consider prioritising the Committee's next scrutiny topic on the basis of the following factors:

a) Freshness / timing of subject

b) public/media interest level

c) usefulness of scrutiny eg. influence on decision makers

d) county wide impact

e) fit with corporate priorities

3 Financial implication

3.1 None

4 Impact assessment

4.1 None

5 Crime prevention

5.1 None

6 Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background documents

The following documents discuss facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and have been relied on to a material extent in the preparation of the report.

NB. This list excludes:

1. Published works

2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

None.

ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION SELECT COMMITTEE

2008/09 SCRUTINY: ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE

BACKGROUND RESEARCH TO SUPPORT CHOICE OF TOPIC

A - Topic Initiation

B - Policy Context

C - Previous scrutinies/reviews

D - Issues/potential areas for scrutiny

A Topic initiation

April 2008

Topic identified through the Select Committee process of generating ideas for scrutiny based on explicit criteria, agreed by the Committee in January. Proposed by Cllr Reid, and supported in principle by the rest of the Committee at their April meeting.

Topic: Road Infrastructure improvements

- Need for a `shopping list' of road infrastructure improvements that will be necessary if the government's proposed levels of housing growth takes place

B Policy context

(i) National

Housing

The Housing Green Paper, Homes for the future: more affordable, more sustainable, July 2007, contains the government's plans for delivering housing growth. The ambition is to deliver a step change in housing supply, supported by adequate infrastructure, in line with the Delivery Agreement supporting the government's long term housing growth PSA target.

`The Government is committed to ensuring that new homes are in sustainable communities - places where people want to live, work and play, and serviced by the full range of infrastructure, services and amenities that communities need - and that the location of new housing supports the Government's objectives for sustainable growth and the effective use of infrastructure capacity.

PSA Delivery Agreement 20: Increase long term housing supply and affordability. HM Government, October 2007

The expansion is being sought for both social and economic reasons. The growth of household formation underpins the rationale, where major social shifts associated with marriage, partnerships and divorce have led to more, smaller households than previous generations had predicted. In addition, current immigration policy has increased the demand for housing, although its long term effects are not yet clear. The national birth rate, rising for the first time in decades, will place major demands on the housing market of future generations.

The planning system is required to base its policies and decisions on the needs of sustainable development. This means that development plans must minimise travel distances, provide a well-related mix of housing, jobs and services, and relate the benefits of the natural environment to social and economic needs.

The call is for 3 million homes by 2020, 2 million of them (240,000 a year) by 2016. Of these, the Housing Green Paper estimated that 980,000 can be built on brownfield land, and a further 100,000 on surplus publicly owned land. This leaves close on 2 million homes to be accommodated elsewhere.

The government will concentrate housing growth on the 45 towns that form the Growth Areas, Growth Points, eco-towns and Housing Renewal Areas.

The government's vision is that by March 2011:

`Local Planning Authorities will have adopted the necessary Development Plan Documents in line with the RSSs (Regional Spatial Strategies) and the Government's ambition, providing the appropriate planning framework for creating mixed and sustainable communities, including well designed, high quality housing supply and supporting infrastructure'

PSA Delivery Agreement 20: Increase long term housing supply and affordability. HM Government, October 2007

Roads and transport

(a) The Eddington and Stern studies confirmed the importance of transport in relation to both contributing to economic growth and productivity, and in contributing to the overall level of reductions in carbon emissions. Eddington did not see the need to criss-cross the country with new road links, arguing for a targeted approach to the most seriously congested parts of our urban, national and international networks. His report stresses that an innovative approach, which makes best use of existing networks through good regulation, and which sends the right price signals to users and transport providers, is likely to be just as important as further investment in new infrastructure.

(b) The most recent discussion document `Towards a Sustainable Transport System: Supporting Economic Growth in a Low Carbon World', Dept. of Transport 2007, responds to the reports of Eddington and Stern, looking at how to translate their recommendations on climate change and a thriving UK economy into transport policy making over the short, medium and long term, through to 2013-14.

The document proposes five goals:

- maximise economic competitiveness and productivity through making the best use of existing networks, targeting infrastructure investment, particularly to international gateways and pinch-points and prioritising the delivery chain

- address the causes of climate change

- protect safety, security and health

- improve quality of life

- promote greater equality of opportunity

(ii) Regional

Planning the right number of houses in the most sustainable locations is an essential part of meeting the social, economic and environmental needs of the region. Regional Spatial Strategies set out the broad direction for development in each region over a 15-20 year period, including housing provision figures for the region disaggregated to district level.

The Regional Spatial Strategy /South East Plan (draft 2006) sets out the direction through to 2026 for a substantial programme of housing development and economic growth, phased and closely related to the availability of infrastructure and associated services.

` The provision of infrastructure and services to support new development is critical.' Executive Summary, page 4

The Implementation Plan identifies the broad infrastructure requirements - services, environmental, transport - in greater detail and includes proposals designed to improve delivery of infrastructure and restore confidence that it will be provided in a timely manner.

The response from the government to the independent panel recommendations, which include the suggestion that Hampshire take another 6,300 new dwellings on top of the 122,000 already proposed, is expected in July 2008. Following further public consultation, the South East Plan is expected to be finalised during early 2009, and will supersede Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996 - 2011 policies. Until then, the Hampshire County Structure Plan provides the baseline provision for new homes, as well as a reserve provision which will be released if, and when, the strategic and local planning authorities decide it is needed.

Monitoring of this aspect of the County Structure Plan showed that house building between 2001 - 2007 exceeded the Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) figure. Dwellings supply for the period 2007 - 2011 is also forecast to exceed the RPG figure by about 9,700 dwellings - some 46% in excess of what Hampshire is required to build.

The Regional Funding Allocation (RFA) is a source of funding for schemes which meet regional criteria and facilitate development. The RFA is fully committed up to 2016

Consultant studies have been commissioned by Transport for South Hampshire and these have considered options for investment in transport, road and rail infrastructure. However, there is no guarantee that the Regional Transport Board will approve them for funding for 2016 onwards.

(iii) Hampshire

The strategic housing role is at the heart of district and borough place shaping as Local Planning Authorities, by ensuring that the right housing, of the highest quality, is in the right place with the necessary infrastructure and support.

Through the process of the South East Plan replacing the County Structure Plan, local boroughs and districts have begun the process of identify sites to meet their housebuilding quotas within their local development frameworks (LDFs). As part of this they will decide whether to include sites which comprise the Structure Plan's reserve housing provision.

It is agreed that in some parts of Hampshire there is less housing supply than in others. It is also acknowledged that infrastructure developments would not need to be based on an assumption of additional population matching additional housing, as some of the take up will be by existing Hampshire residents.

Road infrastructure providers, such as the County Council and he Highways Agency, need to be involved in developing the plans that their infrastructure will support. Involving the providers early on in the process improves the prospects of delivering realistic objectives and policies.

As the Highway Authority, Hampshire County Council is working with districts on (a) the growth agenda, and (b) takes the lead on related Local Area Agreement indicator and target setting.

(a) work with districts on the growth agenda is largely centring on three areas: South Hampshire, North Hampshire and the possible eco town planned for Whitehill and Bordon.

- South Hampshire's road infrastructure is being considered by Transport for South Hampshire (TfSH), established in 2007 as the transport delivery agency for the South Hampshire sub region covering Portsmouth, Southampton and the southern part of Hampshire. TfSH is PUSH's (Partnership for Urban South Hampshire) partner in delivering transport solutions to support the economic and housing growth in the sub region. Growth to 2026 requires the creation of over 80,000 dwellings and associated employment to revitalise South Hampshire. Around 80% of the new development will take place in the established urban areas, largely in the period to 2016. The remaining 20% will be accommodated in the Strategic Development Areas (SDA) at North/North East Hedge End and North Fareham, plus the new Employment Zone at Eastleigh. These will be from 2016 onwards.

Infrastructure needs associated with pressures from growth have been described recently in a Transport for South Hampshire Statement `Towards Delivery' in the context of a broader transport strategy for the areas. The Statement lists a series of packages and interventions required in order to raise the economic competitiveness of the sub region and to deliver the growth agenda. TfSH proposes a range of measures aimed at reducing the need to travel, managing the transport networks and targeted investment - reduce, manage and invest.

` Capital investment will be required on the strategic road network. Investment to improve junction and carriageway capacity will be vital but there remains a limit to the amount of additional traffic that the strategic highway system can accommodate'.

An indicative investment programme of about £2.5 billion for South

Hampshire for the period 2009 - 2019 has been drafted, £2 billion of which

may be suitable for regional (RFA) support. Eight packages of interventions

have been assembled for submission to the 2008 RFA refresh for prioritisation

at a regional level for funding for 2016 onwards; all will require more detailed

work. The residual list of schemes and interventions will need to be

justified as candidates for funding from other sources.

Packages of interventions:

- Access to the Sub Region

- Eastern Access to Southampton, including North/North East Hedge End SDA

- Access in South East Hampshire including North Fareham SDA

- Access to the South Hamsphire Strategic Employment Zone and associated rail improvements

- Access to Tipner (Portsmouth)

- Strategic Traffic Management

- Developing the Evidence Base

- Schemes identified through the Local Development Framework process

- Work in North Hampshire is part of the Western Corridor sub regional strategy area, and is centring on Basingstoke and Aldershott. Land for housing growth is being identified at District level through the Local Development Framework process, and there is preliminary consideration by the District and County of potential road and transport infrastructure requirements for the various site options.

- An eco town proposal for between 5,000 and 8,000 homes, has been submitted, and subsequently shortlisted by the government, for Whitehill and Bordon. Hampshire County Council is working with East Hants District Council on the partnership aspects of the planned development, including roads and transport. Whitehill and Bordon will know whether they are included in the final shortlist of locations later in the year.

Outcomes in relation to roads across an eco town is consideration of the impact on roads and congestion when siting the town, and the planning of infrastructure requirements.

The stage of road infrastructure development is generally described as less well developed in North Hampshire and Whitehill/Bordon than in South Hampshire.

(b) Local Area Agreement targets relating indirectly to road infrastructure are:

- Congestion Hotspots:

· reductions in congestion or congestion growth at (10-20) strategic hotspots

· reductions in congestion or congestion growth at locally identified hot spots (up to 3 per district)

- Accessibility:

· to develop an index of perceived accessibility problems

· through analysis of issues and assessment of potential improvements in access and information agreed successful measures can be introduced

C Previous scrutinies/reviews

A record check of the authority's reviews showed that there have been no scrutinies or Best Value reviews of this topic in the last eight years.

D Issues / potential areas for scrutiny

· how is Hampshire quantifying the needs, costs and phasing of road infrastructure required to support housing growth up to 2023 ?

· what assumptions are made on the rate and scale of growth, and the formulae used?

· do all local planning authorities in Hampshire have sound local infrastructure plans that encompass plans for roads ?

· do all local planning authorities report on progress on the delivery of infrastructure in their Annual Monitoring Report ?

· is there evidence of infrastructure planning being kept under review and updated as necessary ?

· is the demonstration of infrastructure availability and planning part of the soundness test of a development plan document ?

· what are the governance arrangements for the delivery of infrastructure plans ? Are these strong enough ?

· what accountability to elected Members, County, District and Unitary, accompanies road infrastructure planning and monitoring ?

· what is the system for consistent co-ordination of infrastructure delivery across local areas ?

· is there evidence of sound processes between County, District and Unitary Authorities, for highway planning ?

· is there adequate funding for infrastructure development across Hampshire ?

NB. Planning for scrutiny would need to consider the issues of partner local authority involvement.

Philippa Smart, Scrutiny Officer. 23.6.08

ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION SELECT COMMITTEE

2008/09 SCRUTINY WORKPROGRAMME

BACKGROUND RESEARCH TO SUPPORT THE CHOICE OF TOPIC

POTENTIAL TOPIC: WASTE

A Topic initiation

B Policy context

C Previous scrutinies/reviews

D Issues/potential areas for scrutiny

A Topic initiation

April 2008

Topic identified through the Select Committee process of generating scrutiny topic ideas based on explicit criteria, agreed by the Committee in January. Proposed by Cllr House, and supported in principle by the rest of the Committee at their April meeting.

Topic: Waste management- where can real progress be made next ?

- where is the next step change going to come from, in terms of waste handling,

recycling, minimisation, or from somewhere completely different ?

Select Committee discussion:

- (MK) work is underway in the Environment Department within the broader context of the efficient use of resources. The question of how many waste units, and where they might be located, is being looked at, but is unlikely to be sufficiently advanced to support a decision before the end of the year.

B Policy context

a) National

Waste Strategy for England 2007: the strategy's objective is to decouple waste growth from economic growth and put more emphasis on waste prevention and re-use. It outlines how the UK intends to deliver a sustainable approach to all waste, providing a vision, time-related targets and outlines the roles of key organisations. The strategy is also a plan for dealing with waste diverted from landfill and therefore includes recycling, composting and recovery targets for different types of waste.

With regard to biodegradable waste, the strategy specifies recycling and

composting rate targets for local authorities

The Strategy removes the ban on local authorities introducing financial incentives schemes, for example to reward households for reducing and recycling their waste. It is estimated that the schemes could lead to reductions in the amount of non recycled waste of between 13 and 39 per cent.

Local authorities can also enlist the help of third sector organisations with delivery arrangements in their area eg. prevention, re-use and kerbside collection. As part of their local leadership, local authorities are asked to help their local businesses reduce and recycle their waste.

b) European

Much of the legislation around waste implemented in this country in recent years, is a result of European Directives. Initially, the Directive on Waste (1975) (Known as the Waste Framework Directive) set the scene, requiring Member States to sign up to a variety of principles in relation to waste management. This includes giving priority to waste prevention and encouraging reuse and recovery of waste, ensuring that waste is recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and without using processes which could harm the environment etc.

During the 1990's and 2000's, various other directives have come out of Europe which provide regulations around particular elements of waste, for example the Directive on Landfill of Waste (1999). This directive also requires a phased reduction to 35% (by weight) of Biodegradable Municipal Waste being landfilled by 2020 (compared to the levels produced in 1995). It also bans the landfilling of hazardous wastes, clinical wastes and tyres, and prevents the co-disposal of hazardous and non hazardous waste after July 2004.

The Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste (1994) obligates Member States to meet targets for the recovery and recycling of packaging waste and requires encouragement of use of recycled packaging materials, and minimisation of packaging volume and weight. Targets have been agreed by the EU to be met by 31^st December 2008. The overall recovery target is 60%, with recycling targets between 55% and 80%. (Specific targets are given for different types of packaging material)

Other Key European Directives on Waste include those on Hazardous Waste, Batteries and Accumulators, Waste Incineration, End of Life Vehicles and Electrical and Electronic Equipment.

c) Regional / sub regional

(i) The South East Plan (draft 2006) sets out the direction and scale of change that is needed to sustain a high quality of life across the region.

The policy on waste and minerals:

- aims to reduce growth in waste generated

- proposes minimising reliance on landfill through recycling and composting of as much waste as possible, with further recovery of energy from materials that cannot be recycled

- provides for a large number and range of new facilities to provide for recycling and recovery

- reduces the amount of waste exported from London for disposal in the south east

- increases the use of recycled aggregates, while also planning for an adequate supply of raw materials for building

- promotes the use of sustainable construction techniques to reduce waste and make use of recycled materials

(ii) The Hampshire, Portsmouth, Southampton and New Forest National

Park Minerals and Waste Core Strategy was adopted by Hampshire's four minerals and waste planning authorities in 2007. The strategy sets out a spatial vision for future minerals and waste planning in Hampshire and explains its role in the planning process.

` By 2020, Hampshire will achieve a world class and sustainable material resources system that maximises both the efficient use of primary materials and the reuse and recycling of wastes, and minimises the need for disposal.

As far as possible, waste will be managed near to where it is produced and in accordance with the waste hierarchy. Value will be recovered through technically advanced re-use, recycling and composting processes, or failing that, through the recovery of energy and / or materials from the waste. The amount of waste going to landfill will be very limited in quantity and biodegradable content.'

Hampshire, Portsmouth, Southampton and New Forest National Park Minerals and Waste Core Strategy. 2007

One of ten objectives is to help eliminate waste growth in the long term and meet or exceed regional targets to limit waste growth to 0.5% a year by 2020.

New waste facilities will be linked to major areas of new development, and strategic scale facilities will be located on Hampshire's two growth areas in the north east and south of the county. Significant amounts of new development will be necessary: recycling and composting sites, recovery and treatment sites, non hazardous landfill sites, inert landfill sites etc.

d) Hampshire

(i) Project Integra - a formal partnership to deliver sustainable waste management - was set up to enable joint working between Hampshire County Council, Southampton and Portsmouth Unitary Councils and the district and borough councils. Project Integra has developed a material resources approach to waste management known as the Hampshire Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy, 2006 (JMWMS). NB. `municipal waste' includes household waste, but also material collected from streets, beaches and other open public spaces. It also includes commercial waste or recyclate which is similar to household waste and collected by a local authority or on their behalf.

With regard to waste, the approach is to try to reduce the amount of waste that must be disposed of. It relies partly on advice and input from local communities and businesses in engaging with it to bring about changes in attitudes and behaviour to help reduce pressure on natural resources.

The JMWMS defined five strategic waste management options for Hampshire:

· status quo

· status quo plus commercial waste collection element

· enhanced collection/treatment methods; maximise waste minimisation; no commercial waste element

· Materials Resources Strategy (MRS) pattern activity ie. enhanced collection/treatment methods with waste minimisation and commercial waste elements

· Enhanced MRS pattern activity ie. enhanced collection/treatment methods with enhanced waste minimisation and commercial waste elements

The fifth option became the partners preferred option, which includes reducing waste growth to 1% by 2010 and 0.5% by 2020, and achieving recycling and composting targets for all waste of 50% by 2010, 55% by 2015 and 60% by 2020.

Hampshire has been widely acknowledged for its partnership working on waste, its impressive integrated waste management facilities, relatively high performance and its contribution to shifting fundamental thinking from waste to resource management. NB Resource management involves implementing more sustainable design, production, management and consumption so as to reduce the need for primary raw materials and reduce the amount of waste disposed. This contrasts with the more traditional approach of meeting the demand for new materials and the need for waste management.

(ii) The Project Integra Action Plan 2008-2013 sets out the strategic outcomes which the partnership aims to deliver over a five year period in order to meet its long term objectives. It addresses 5 strategic outcomes:

- sustainable recycling

- eliminating landfill

- commercial materials management

- efficiencies/value for money

- leadership and influence

(iii) The current Hampshire Local Area Agreement which runs until 2010 has

set a target of reducing the percentage of municipal waste to landfill from 15% in 2008 to 12% in 2010/2011, and by April 2011 to have in place an agreed strategic direction which gets Hampshire to as close to zero landfill as is possible, with a detailed implementation plan in place.

(iv) The Hampshire County Council Corporate Business Plan includes the

outcome : The majority of waste is diverted from landfill. Performance measures the percentage diverted, as well as progress with the Aalborg Commitment to avoid and reduce waste, and increase re-use and recycling.

(v) Current and future municipal waste picture.

(from Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy/Project Integra Action Plan)

· residents of Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton generate over 890,000 tonnes of municipal waste each year

· despite general levelling off in post 2000/01, the amount of municipal waste has generally increased over the last 5 years

· in Hampshire, paper, card and putrescible waste such as garden refuse and food waste form the greater part of the waste produced by Hampshire residents; plastics represent the next largest portion. Together, these constitute 63% of waste produced.

· In 2005 the fate of municipal waste in Hampshire was:

- 23% to landfill

- 10% composted

- 47% to energy recovery

- 20% recycled

· Expectations among the public are increasing with regard to recycling

· Hampshire is fast running out of spaces to bury waste. Drivers, such as the Landfill Tax Escalator, will progressively see the phasing out of landfill for biodegradable materials.

· Hampshire is on track to exceeding the new national targets with the exception of the target to reduce the amount of household waste not re-used, recycled or composted to 225kg per person in 2020.

C Scrutinies/reviews in the last 5 years

D Issues / potential areas for scrutiny

a) Project Integra

`To enable the partnership to address its strategic objectives in a coherent way, Integra needs to adopt a more corporate approach than it has done in the past and fully explore the benefits and added value that closer partnership working will bring in terms of streamlining decision making, reducing duplication and contributing to improved performance and efficiency'.

Project Integra Action Plan 2008 - 2013, page 16.

Risks to the delivery of Project Integra workstreams, identified in the Action Plan include:

- that there are inadequate resources to meet all priorities that have been identified (Medium Risk/High Impact)

- poor internal communication, leading to reduced efficiency and effectiveness (Medium Risk/High Impact)

While Project Integra has a Policy Review and Scrutiny Committee as part of its Constitution, this has been described as having a primarily performance monitoring focus, and not exercising a broader `challenge' or `critical friend' role, or taking a wider perspective in terms of asking fundamental questions about whether or how waste policy and strategy priorities might change.

Recognising the distinct statutory responsibilities of the county as waste

disposal authority (WDA) and districts/boroughs as waste collection

authorities (WCA), and unitary authorities as both WDAs and WCAs, the

work of a WDA is affected naturally by the variations in performance of the WCAs, some of which are performing above the England national average, and others below.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Potential areas for scrutiny:

- How the Project Integra partnership intends to achieve that more corporate

approach, what needs to happen to facilitate this, is there a political will

amongst the parties concerned, how do the partners need to change ?

- Can the risks identified be overcome ? what risk management plans are in

place ? How are they monitored ?

- How do Project Integra partners work together to raise the performance of

the least best districts while supporting further progress by the best ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

b) Approach to waste

At the moment, economic growth goes hand in hand with growth in waste produced. However penalties for landfilling waste are due to increase steeply. How can the council, with a growing tonnage of waste to dispose of year on year, reduce the amount it sends to landfill?

- Efficiency/investment in infrastructure

Become more efficient in how waste is dealt with, for example educate people to gain greater take up and correct usage of existing recycling options, offer other types of recycling such as collecting household organic waste, invest in more incinerators.

However, these options are unlikely to have the required impact in isolation, and in the case of incinerators will be costly to put in place.

- Behaviour Change

Reduce the amount of waste entering the system by working to effect behaviour change, to encourage the public to choose to buy items with less packaging, choose to use re-usable bags instead of plastic bags etc. (customer demand for less packaging should influence the supermarkets to meet this demand). If successful, this could cause the amount of waste produced to level off instead of always increasing, and perhaps even reduce.

However, behaviour change will take time to take effect, and will require leadership, cooperation from producers and retailers to reduce waste in what they provide to the public, and work would need to be done to ensure that efforts by the council could influence people's behaviour and were therefore worthwhile.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Potential areas for scrutiny:

- What is the balance between the two approaches of efficiency/infrastructure investment and behaviour change at present ? How much is invested in each ? How successful is the current Project Integra Behaviour Change Strategy ?

- Is there an evidence base for achieving more through focusing on long term

behaviour change ? How have other European countries with successful track records in waste used this approach ?

NB.

(i) Planning for a scrutiny review would need to consider the issues of partner involvement, and compatibility with the Project Integra Policy Review and Scrutiny Committee.

(ii) Scoping of a scrutiny review would need to consider the timing as well as the added value it would bring to work already underway through Project Integra's various workstreams that are preceding a future Executive Member decision on waste.

Philippa Smart, Scrutiny Officer. June 2008.