Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Jon Askew and Patrick Sheard.  Councillors George Potter and Catherine Young were present as substitutes for Councillors Jon Askew and Patrick Sheard, respectively.

In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must not participate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, the councillor must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

Councillors Diana Jones, Steven Lee, George Potter, Maddy Redpath and James Steel declared non-pecuniary interests in agenda item number 5 owing to their involvement with the Plastic Free Guildford residents’ group.

To confirm the minutes of the Executive Advisory Board meeting held on

Subject to the substitution of the word ‘generally’ for the word ‘strongly’ in the first bullet point of the Chairman’s summary of the main views expressed by the Board contained in minute number PMI28 concerning Regulation 18 Consultation on Local Plan: Development Management Policies to read: ‘The scope of the proposed policies and the strength of their links to issues related to climate change, biodiversity and protection were generally supported.’, the minutes of the meeting of the Board held on 17 February 2020 were confirmed and would be signed by the Chairman at the earliest opportunity.

However, some concerns were expressed regarding the use of draft minutes to convey the Board’s views to the Council at its meeting held on 5 May 2020 and the capture of all points made at the last EAB meeting by members and non-members.  The Board was advised that as its following meeting scheduled for 6 April 2020 had been cancelled owing to the Coronavirus pandemic, there had not been an opportunity for it to approve its minutes before they were used to report views to the Council meeting.  The Board was reminded that minutes were not intended to be verbatim records of meetings and that the forward focus should be on capturing the essence of views expressed and reaching agreement in respect of advisory points to be forwarded to the Executive or Council for consideration.

Councillors considered a note which briefed the Board on the draft Climate Change, Sustainable Design, Construction and Energy Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) appended to the note and invited its comments on the draft document for consideration by officers as part of the related consultation process.  The note described the background, scope and role of the SPD and set out the process and next steps.

The Policy Officer – Planning Policy gave a presentation to introduce and explain the SPD.  The presentation covered Development Plan Documents (DPDs), the difference between DPDs and SPDs, Local Plan: Strategy and Sites 2015-2034 policies addressed by this SPD, and the aims of this SPD together with an outline of the Sustainable Design and Construction Guide forming part of it.

The SPD was closely aligned to Local Plan Policies and covered Policy D2: Climate Change, Sustainable Design, Construction and Energy; Policy D1: Place shaping (paragraphs 2 and 10); and Policy P4: Flooding, flood risk and groundwater protection zones (paragraph 5).

Policy D2 consisted of sections relating to climate change adaptation, energy, and design and construction.  It featured principles set out in energy and waste hierarchies whilst requiring submissions in respect of sustainable design and construction / climate change adaptation, and of low carbon energy / carbon emissions in relation to major and non-major developments.

Policy D1 required all new development to perform positively against ‘Building for Life’ guidance whilst meeting industry standards for new design, limited coverage of energy efficiency and efficient use of natural resources to maximise passive solar gain.

Prioritisation for sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) relating to surface water management and mitigation of heavy rainfall events were required under Policy P4.

The aims of the SPD were to encourage compliance with policy, ensure an improved decision-making process and achieve better development outcomes.  There were six sections of the SPD which were an introduction, summary of policy, overview of information that must be submitted in support of planning applications, energy statements (major development), sustainability statements (major development) and requirements for non-major developments.

The Sustainable Design and Construction Guide aligned content with policy, provided guidance on best design and construction practice, and was based on guidance from reputable bodies and internal practitioners.  The Guide covered an energy hierarchy; site layout; landscaping and urban form; building design; water efficiency; climate change adaptation; measures that enabled sustainable lifestyles; resources, materials and waste; and building for life.

The following points arose from related questions, comments and discussion:

·             In terms of abbreviations in the SPD, it was clarified that SAP was an acronym for the Standard Assessment Procedure which was the methodology used by the Government to assess and compare the energy and environmental performance of dwellings and SBEM was an abbreviation for the Simplified Building Energy Model which was a tool developed to provide an analysis of a building's energy consumption.  Developers were required to provide the latter to meet the Building Regulations.  The relevant industries were familiar with both acronyms.

·             It was suggested that wood chip  ...  view the full minutes text for item PMI4

The Interim Head of Asset Management (Climate Change Lead) gave a presentation concerning initiatives to implement a plastic free Guildford policy as an explanatory introduction to her related report which invited the EAB to consider the actions taken to date to reduce the use and impact of non-recyclable Single Use Plastics (SUPs) and recommend a way forward for the Council to undertake further work towards a plastic free Guildford and in doing so, help to deliver the Council’s Corporate Plan priority to protect the environment.

The presentation covered the national framework and local commitment relating to reducing the use of SUPs, the Council’s achievements to date, the role of the Surrey Environment Partnership (SEP), other councils’ approaches and the recommended way forward.

The national framework consisted of the UK’s 25 Year Environment Plan which was published by the Government in January 2018 with a target to achieve zero avoidable plastic waste by the end of 2042, and the Waste and Resources Strategy 2018-19 published by DEFRA and setting out ambitious plans for a greener future with financial incentives.

On 23 July 2019 the Council adopted a motion recognising the damage plastics could cause to the environment and committed the authority to working with local communities to reduce the negative impact of the use of SUPs in so far as it was reasonable to do so.  The Council asked that this EAB make recommendations, as appropriate, to the Executive on how to achieve each of the seven commitments set out in the motion.  The Council’s commitment was to work to reduce the use of non-recyclable SUPs as announced on 23 July 2019 to play its part in delivering the SEP’s SUP Strategy (2018) and 5-year action plan, reduce the impact through use of SUPs and support, promote and encourage plastic free initiatives and events within the Borough.

The Council asked that this EAB make recommendations, as appropriate, to the Executive on how to achieve each of the seven points (a) to (g) below:

a. Avoid Council use of SUPs.

b. Encourage local businesses to avoid use of SUPs.

c. Engage with and support the Plastic Free Guildford Group.

d. Work with suppliers to discourage use of avoidable SUPs.

e. Support local communities to reduce the use of SUPs.

f. Support the national water refill campaign.

g. Work with partners to investigate effective and sustainable incentives for the return of SUPs for recycling.

In terms of achieving the Council’s commitments to date, examples included the cessation of some plastic use, communication with residents and businesses and community engagement, caterer’s packaging constructed from recyclable materials, newly installed water bottle refilling stations and supporting staff to recycle more waste.

The twelve Surrey councils within the SEP came together and created a SUP Strategy for Surrey, the primary objective of which was to avoid producing plastic waste.  The Strategy featured a five year plan and an ambition for residents to: “live in clean, safe and green communities, where people and organisations embrace their  ...  view the full minutes text for item PMI5

The Executive Forward Plan was noted without comment.

To consider and approve the EAB’s draft work programme. 

A councillor reported that work in relation to the provision of solar farms had been pursued and she would discuss the matter with relevant officers as this may be an area of future interest for the EAB.

The wish to see unscheduled work programme items, such as Supplementary Planning Documents, at a sufficiently early stage to enable initial input to policy development and review of consultation responses prior to Executive determination was emphasised.

To consider whether remote meetings of the EAB held during the Coronavirus lockdown should commence at an earlier time e.g. 6:00 pm.

As remote Council meetings held due to the Coronavirus lockdown were felt to be more complex, lengthy and demanding than regular meetings, the Board was invited to consider whether remote meetings of the EAB should commence at an earlier time, for example 6:00 pm, to allow more timely completion of the transaction of business.  The Board indicated that it wished the start time of its meetings to remain at 7:00 pm to accommodate employment and other commitments.