 Gweithio gweithio, ac yn y gwirionedd, mae'n gwirionedd, o'r dweud i'r dweud ymddangos, yr hyn ymddangos, yn ymddangos, ac o'r dweud i'r dweud i'r dweud i'r dweud. Felly mae'n gwirionedd o'r dweud i'r dweud o'r Dynifroedd Cymru, ac mae'n gyfnod y dyfodol. Dyma'r gweithio ar hynny, ac mae'n gweithio ar gyfer y dyfodol, dyma'r Gweithio'r Dynifroedd Cymru ar y dweud i'r digwydd, i'r llychwyr cwysig yng Nghymru i'r cymryd ag i'r llychwyr a'r lyddiol yn y gweithio a'r ymddorol. Rwy'n meddwl i'r ddefnyddio i'r gymryd y dda i'r ei cyffredin hwn i'r cymryd a'r cyfyn yn ystod oedd y cymryd. Rwy'n meddwl i'n meddwl, mae'n nhw'n dechreu i'r rymd fath o'r rhwng i'r rhwng i'r rhwng i'r rhwng i'r rhwng, ar ymateb i fy mwneud am yng ngondol, mae'r cyntaf yng Nghymru yn cerddt, gan ymlaeddiwch mor hysnod yn Lyfr. Mae'n gyrddio'r ddwy moddol iawn ein phobl iawn. Felly mae'r cyfnod yn gefnol i ni'n cerddfa ar hyn. Mae'r cyfnod yn cyfnod yn ysgolion sy'n gynhyrchu'r hyn a'r gyrddio'r cyfnod. Mae'n gandd Rydym wedi ffrwng, neu mae'n gyrddio'r cyffredinol i ni. ymrhaen. Yr unrhyw hwn yn ymddangodd. Felly, mae'r unrhyw hwn yn ymddangodd, mae'r unrhyw hwn yn ymddangodd. Mae'n cael ei bryd yn ei wneud i'ch gwellu'r parwysgol, ac mae'n bwynt i'ch gael i'n daith i'r cwmwyntio y tîm eich bod syniadau sydd â Gweithwyr, ac mae'n hynny'n gweithio i'n engageinio eu damwyr Rah rankree'r Llywodraeth ac i full mightych yn yr heb i'n gweithio i'r ysgandd o bwysigol, ac rydw i'n redyn nhw'n ddod, ond i'n gweithio i'n gweithwyr Rah rankree i'w tîm eich gweithwyr Llywodraeth yn yма. Yn patients, wedi'i gwybod i'r ysgandd, dwi wedi digwydd ynddo gyda Llywodraeth yn ystod ydi oedd yw'r ysgandd. and we also have Councillor Heather Williams, I represented the Maureen's Ward and substituting for Councillor Buttarch air. For some reason, the microphones want to link up to wallets. Thank you. Hi, good afternoon. I'm Councillor Lisa Redger. I'm a member for Hearthstone and Cormitton Ward. Thank you very much. In terms of officers as well. Hi, Alex Meling Day, Waste Policy, Climate and Environment Lead at Southcams. Thank you very much. John Cornel, Natural Environment Team Lead, Greater Cambridge Shared Plan. Thank you very much. I'm Jane Green, the Built Natural Environment Manager over the three disciplinary teams we've got from the Shared Planning Service as well. Thank you very much and we have joining us on line. Good afternoon, everybody. I'm Luke Ordinton, our Project Officer in the Climate Environment Team. Thank you very much. And we have Councillor Brian Milne's, I think. Yes, so the Brian Milne's Deputy Leader and the Lead Member for Environment on the Cabinet. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks very much and here also together with us. Hello, Laurence Murray-Hulman. I'm Democratic Services for the Climate and Environment Advisory Committee. Thank you very much. And we also have, yeah. We have Patrick Adams, who is also absolutely invaluable support to everybody into the committee. So thank you very much. Yes. And we also have all the givens project officer, Climate and Environment Team. Thank you very much, Laura. Thank you very much. And it's really good to note that South Camsa has recently been accredited as a bronze carbon literate organisation by the Carbon Literacy Project. And this was one of the things in the review in terms of the climate leagues that was looking at how much South Camsa was investing in training up of its officers on climate and environment issues, which is what they call carbon literacy. So it's really good to know that that investment's made and that we've got the bronze level in terms of bronze carbon literature organisation, which is really good. And yesterday it was also very interesting to be at the Action on Energy meeting together with Alex, who was there, and colleagues also from Cambridge City Council to look at issues around retrofitting the challenge on what we should be doing around that. So those are key things. So if we move to the agenda, we have the first item, which will be Apologies. Thank you, chair. I've received three apologies today from councillors Sandford, Ariel Kahn and Batharcharia. And councillor Heather Williams has kindly stepped in the sub for councillor Batharcharia. Thank you. Thank you very much. And gender item two is declarations of interest for any of the items on the agenda. Thank you. And then we go to agenda item three, which is minutes of the previous meeting. Does anybody have any comments on the minutes of the previous meeting? No, we don't have any comments, so those are approved. Thank you very much. And then we'll go to the substantive items on the agenda, which are two items. And the first one is in terms of biodiversity net gain and an update on the actions in support of biodiversity net gain and our aspiration of the 20% of biodiversity net gain in support of our doubling nature ambitions and aspirations. So I think John, for now you're going to take us through this report. Thank you very much, chair. I will share my screen and share a short presentation that I've put together on what we've done thus far with biodiversity net gain. So biodiversity net gain is a new duty for all councils in England and came out of the Environment Act in 2021. I'm going to give a little bit of background before we get into the actual detail of what we've done over the last 12 to 18 months in the council. So as I'm sure you're aware, value in nature is a very important part of the work that we do at the council. Natural systems link up with the economics of our lives and ecosystem services such as cycling water, pollinating crops, climate regulation, that kind of thing. In fact, according to the ONS, the government's very own Office of National Statistics, natural capital, was valued in 2020, so it's a couple of years old, at £1.8 trillion. And just to give some perspective, UK GDP in the same year was £2.3 trillion, so that gives you a sense of the kind of importance of natural capital to us and to our economy. If you put in, include health benefits associated with natural recreation, a newly estimated cultural service in the UK is estimated at about £600 billion again for 2020, so just a little bit of background on that. And for those of you that don't know what natural capital is, it's one of those terms, natural capital defines the stocks of natural assets which include geology, soil, air, water, all of the living things in creation. So it's from this natural capital that we can drive a wide range of services, often called ecosystem services, which make our lives possible or more comfortable. So that's a little bit from government ONS, but what about our residents, what about the people? So according to Ipsos, Ipsos is a recognised polling agency. According to them, in August 2023, the index for public concern about climate change and environment doubled to become a third joint biggest issue facing the UK. One in four, Britain's viewed the environment as an important issue for the country in August. Now I must say I've had a look today and the September date is a little bit different, so there's some movement, but this gives an indication that our residents feel climate environment is up there, things like the NHS, immigration use, other very important issues for us all. So where are we? We're in South Cams, aren't we? And South Cambridgeshire is a very diverse place. There are some pictures of Cambridge City in there because of course I work for the Greater Cambridgeshire Planning Service, which does include the city of Cambridge. It's a very diverse place with villages, farmland, urban development, all kinds of stuff. If we look at it from an air photo taken in the summer, we could look at this and arguably say, well, that looks very green, what's the problem? Lots of green, lots of green there, very green. However, most of that's farmland and in fact, Cambridgeshire, South Cams has a very, very low percentage of land managed for nature. So it's deceptive that when we look around us and we see lots of green fields and trees, it all looks like it's fabulous, but actually it's very, very nature-depleted. And to overlay on top of this, this is for our first proposals for the new local plan. This is just the sense of the kinds of development pressure that we have on the fringe within the Districts of South Cambridgeshire. I would ask my policy colleagues to maybe make the text a little bit larger because it's difficult for me to read. But the take-home from this slide is that the expected development between now and 2050, 2060 is about 60,000 homes and all kinds of other development in terms of jobs and economy. So we live in a region, we live in an area which has very, very high development pressure and we live in an area in a region which has a very, very low starting point for biodiversity. And those two things are critical when you think about what we're trying to do. So why would biodiversity gain, net gain, why now, is what the slide says. I've already mentioned ecosystem services and from my list down there in the bottom left, some of those are ecosystem services but some are just about quality placemaking. Remember that me and my team sit within the planning department and planning is about quality placemaking. It's not about volume house building. Very important if we're considering biodiversity and green infrastructure. So quality placemaking, some of the ecosystem services that are delivered through biodiversity net gain include air quality, that flood resilience, as I've said before, green infrastructure access to green infrastructure from that by residence, climate and biodiversity emergencies which have been called on by both councils, microclimate shading, mental health. I mean this list goes on and on. It's an exhaustive list. This is just an indication of the kinds of benefits that we can see coming forward through a biodiversity net gain and its associated benefits. So what is biodiversity net gain? For those of you that maybe don't know, and I will read from the screen because otherwise I'll just destroy it. But essentially it's an approach to development that aims to leave the natural environment in a measurably better state than it was before the development took place. And this approach to net gain supersedes the, it's like the older approach and that was called no net loss. And no net loss is a model that said if we're going to develop here we're going to ensure that we don't lose any biodiversity at the end of it. It's going to be a net loss model. And that actually never worked. It never worked. We always ended up losing a little bit of quality in the area. And so net gain tries to say we will add 10%, 20% if it's actually something we're going for in our local plan, our new local plan is looking at about 20%. We're going to put back more than we took. And that way we don't just protect our environment, we actually enhance it and begin to double nature and do the things that we've sought to do. So that's what biodiversity net gain BMG is. And this nature recovery is about just about stepping beyond simply conservation into active restoration of the natural world and halting the decline that species abundance by 2030. That's what it is. We've had a lot of help from national policy going back about a decade, the Lawton Review 2010, Making Space for Nature. It was really guidance, more than anything else. The government's Green Future, so 25 year environment plan, National Planning Policy Framework, which actually does set out regulations and it includes net gain. Unhelpfully though, when net gain was first brought forward in the NPPF there wasn't a figure. It was just net gain. So that meant that if you were a developer you could do 1%. That's fine. You could do 10%. What the Environment Act did in 2021 is it said for the first time, no, you will deliver a minimum of 10% net gain. And that's what we've got coming down the pipe very, very soon. So the national policy has been there to help us and continues to. But locally we've had a lot of help as well. So the doubling nature strategy from this council in 2021 set out some bold visions for how we wanted to double nature. The biodiversity supplementary planning document from 2022, adopted by this council and City of Cambridge, again put a little bit more detail on the guidance. And of course that last picture there is the front cover of our emerging. Not sure how many years out we are, but the local plan which has climate change, biodiversity, well-being, great places at the heart. So the policy is there to support it, whether it's local or national. These are the key components, if you like, or the biodiversity net gain. So the Town and Country Planning Act will be amended. A minimum of 10% will be required. Habitat will be secured for at least 30 years. Delivered on-site or off-site or by a new statutory credit system will be a national register. It doesn't change existing protections for important habitats and species. It maintains the mitigation hierarchy. It's all good stuff, all quite straightforward and all measured in a standardised way. The timeline I've touched on already. In November 2021 the Environment Act came forward and there was a transition period of two years. And we were expecting that two-year transition to culminate this November, so next month, in the laying of secondary legislation, in the production of guidance, and essentially it's starting done for 10% net gain. And what's happened is over the summer the government have had a bit of a think and I said, well no, we're not going to do this November. It's starting going for this is going to be January 2024. However, the secondary legislation is still being laid before Parliament in November. The guidance is still coming out in November. And so the delay of two months is not worrying us at all. We are going to, we are carrying on the momentum, the inertia behind what we've been building to for the last two years is not going to be affected by two months delay with Christmas in the middle, by the way. So we're not viewing this as some catastrophe. So this is, yeah, the timeline, the transition period, within that transition period, the last two years essentially we've done an awful lot of work and I'm going to talk a little bit about what we have done and that contained within the report that I submitted to the committee. So starting off, we, gosh, going back two years, we secured, managed to secure funding from the Department of Farming and Rural Affairs to essentially pay for additional resources because new burden for the Council of Bar of Estonet gain is not something that we can deliver with existing resources. There's just no way. So we secured that funding. On the basis of that, we were able to hire a second ecologist onto the team full-time permanent post to help us deliver that BNG and new burden. We've developed and delivered training for planners. Members are coming, it is coming, but we've delivered training to planners from actually across the county, not just within Reddick Cambridge. We did an event back in July. We've been working with our policy colleagues to deliver and develop, sorry, BNG policy to ensure that what's in the new policies in the local plan reflects things like 20% and not 10. That's ongoing work. We've recently put an HLF bid in, a bid for a parish engagement post because we recognise that parishes aren't really, you know, it's okay if we get our ducks lined up, but the parish is a little bit out in the cold. We want to support them. We can't really do with existing resource, and so we've asked for some money for Heritage Lottery to get that new post in. We're looking at systems data to ensure that we can manage the BNG data as it comes in from planning applications. We've developed an off-site approach which we brought to council, I think, last June. That was passed, so we now have an idea of how we're going to deal with BNG, whether it's on-site or off-site. We've recently signed our first Section 6 agreement with Habitat Bank at Lower Valley Farm, which is owned by the county council, and that will act as a strategic location where biodiversity credits can be purchased for developers who cannot deliver on-site, although on-site is of course always the first and preferred option. We are in the process of developing the BNG pre-app service for developers, applicants who seek more information, don't have the information they need, so that's up and running, I think, from November. And of course, finally, we're working. We have been working with other councils, so all of the stuff that we're doing, we're not doing it on our own. We're working, we're talking to hunts, we're talking to county, we're talking to the other districts, I'm sure it's joined up and that we can actually help them in some regards, whether it's through training or resource or whatever it is. So that's a little bit on what we've been doing. Important to say, this work is ongoing. We need to secure ongoing funding, whether it's through DEFRA. We have funding from DEFRA for next year, but of course this won't end. We're going to have to make sure that this thing pays for itself. We have to manage the BNG process because from January, you know, that's when the fun and game start and we have to ensure that we're managing it in a measured and transparent process. You have to train staff and members so that there's a broad understanding of what this means for local councils. Secure new section 106 agreements continue to help our policy colleagues develop policy and again work and support other councils and so in a large nutshell maybe that's what we've been doing and that's what we're hoping to do going forward. Busy time, but very rewarding and hopefully useful. Any questions? Thank you so much. So opening that up for questions and as well with cabinet member online as well, Councillor Brynmill, if you wanted to ask any questions, let's start with cabinet member. Thank you, chair. Thank you for that report. It's really good to hear. I noticed in your report that it said that data storage was going to be really critical into how this worked. I just wondered what systems you had for that and how it works with baseline I guess to make sure that we're clear on what the baseline is before somebody comes in to do some work and whether there's any scope for the public to help provide that data. Thank you. Great question. So I'll take that as a two-parter. The first part on systems, we were exploring systems probably about a year ago because it was the last thing people think of but then the first thing they need, right? So we actually talked to our own ICT teams within the free ICT about developing the system. We looked at current systems and amendments. There's a system called Uniform which we're using planning which had a sort of a BNG tab that was added by the developer and it kind of did the trick but not really. So it's been a bit of a tricky journey. Tomorrow, I can tell you, tomorrow we have a meeting with a developer who's produced some very promising software called Verna. Should I mention that? I'm not sure if I should mention that but anyway. There are other firms today. No other firms, of course, thank you. But we're meeting with them, I'm meeting with them, with our ecologists to look at what they've got and to talk through it. It's been recommended to us by PASS, Planning Advisory Service. So we have some hope. If that doesn't take the box, there are others out there, other systems which we have also been exploring. Our ecologist has been talking with our section 26 officers about some software that they've recently purchased or are looking to purchase. So, yes, incredibly important and we're doing everything we can to ensure that we're ready for day one. The second part of your question is about baseline, I believe. Tricky one. In as much as voluntary, so the way that baseline data is collected is through something called the DEFRA metric. It's a standardised process that DEFRA developed over the last few years. It's a very complicated, I mean it's an Excel-based product, but it's very complicated really to fill it in correctly and to understand what you're looking at, what it means, is it correct? It means to be a trained ecologist. And as much as citizen science has a role, absolutely has a role for us going forward, it's probably not this role. So the way that the baseline is recorded for BNG sites is that the developer would pay for their own consultant to do that baseline. Our role as a local authority is to check their work. So you have essentially two, you have checks and balances, you have the developer saying we think it's this, our ecologist team looking at that, doing a site visit and saying okay, we agree or no, we don't. That's how that system works. Yeah, thank you. I guess part of what I was trying to get out was if people try and fiddle the system a little bit and perhaps try and suggest that biodiversity is lowered due to any sort of clearing or anything like that in the run-up to their application. I didn't know if there was any sort of controls on that and that's potentially why I was asking about neighbours and other people and other ways of collecting data. So I kind of have an idea of what may have been there. Can I just come in there? We did bring this up when we were looking at the biodiversity supplementary planning document and I think we had a similar conversation, so I think we'd just be good to confirm it though and that is the baseline as we understand goes from when this came first to Parliament. So actually that is what year did you say that was which was 2020, 30th of January 2020 is the baseline. But the point, the baseline is only there if there's a record somewhere of what was there since January 2020. So I think where Councillor Redrup is coming from is we know that for monitoring to be used by the planning system it should be recorded with the Cambridge and Peterborough Environmental Recording Centre which is based here in Cumball. And so what we were talking about is encouraging those who know that there could be areas that are destined for development to be helping and ensuring that there is baseline environmental data. So there could be through the support to parishes, there could be encouragement to citizens to upload to the Environmental Recording Centre rather than just between each other and to their clubs and monitor you know because that doesn't count unless it gets into where the planning ecologists go to. So if we can get that into the Environmental Recording Centre I think that is where your question is coming from, empowerment of people to make sure there is a baseline to some extent. My question is that doubling nature proposal is talking about doubling the area of semi-natural environment. That was the meeting that I went to natural temperature that's what they were talking about is raising from 700% to 15% of the area. So there's two types of net gain you can do is one is improving existing sites and one is actually converting sites and obviously the ability to achieve the target depends upon which the priority goes to which. Is there any guidance about how that should be directed? Yes, great question. Thank you Councillor Khan. So my understanding is doubling nature is not just about area it's about quality. But there was a specific target mentioned. Okay from natural temperature. So perhaps I can clarify from natural temperature board so there are multiple measures it's a mixture of measures so some is area some is quality some is species and some is habitat so I think it's about. Through this particular so part of us in net gain will be like everything else in planning context dependent. In terms of balancing and offsetting what the take is the approach is not strictly like for like in as much as if you're losing you know a hectare of whatever kind of habitat you need to replace exactly that hectare of similar habitat but we are that the stear has been remember the guidance isn't out yet so we've been making this up as we go a little but the steer from groups like the wildlife trust and natural temperature has been that really the preferred option is that if we're losing land on Calcareo's grassland then mitigation should be as close to as possible where the harm has taken place and so we've got priority habitat areas mapped that some natural temperature have done and so we're using that as a guideline it's much broader than like for like though I suspect that the government guidance will be in line without I don't have a crystal ball but if we're forced down the like for like route it's going to be quite tough because and you know we've got irreplaceable habitats we've got all kinds of other stuff coming to the mix it's going to make it really difficult so in terms of prioritisation I'm not my answers I'm not sure yet because there's a basic problem that some habitats take hundreds of years to develop some take you know you tend to end up getting a lot of wetlands because they tend to develop relatively rapidly you know mature woodland takes hundreds of years so that's the problem gas layer the williams thank you chair and I have to say I think on your presentation you said about how there's a very big thought process and it's high on people's priorities around here about the environment and on the presentation there was a picture about save our green belt obviously that was a protest against a busway that is being supported by this council and so that that sort of triggered me to think where is the priority in the policies on preservation because we all want better environment better quality we want net gain but I've sat on planning committee and been thoroughly frustrated when people say well we're going to I think we had an application sort of born cast an area and they were going to offset it in full born or vice versa and now with the best one in the world they're not going to gather all of the animals the insects and everything and displace them to full born so where throughout these policies I say given given the example there of the engagement on against nature which is this council's policy to have the busway where is that balance in the policies on preservation sort of in the hierarchy looking at the net gain how is that tightrope being managed so the mitigation hierarchy which is in all of the documentation that we either have signed up to or taken guidance from says first do no harm mitigation hierarchy if you can do it somewhere else do it somewhere else if you can do it somewhere else and then there is a hierarchy of if you're going to do it here if you must do it here then you know you need to take these considerations in hand with regards to the balance of I think what you're asking is offsite versus on site because you mentioned full born so what's happening in full born is this a strategic habitat bank habitat creation bank from the planning side we recognise that the logistical practicalities of delivering net gain and I'm not talking about growing instructor I'm not talking about the difference between those two I'm happy to do that but net gain which is primarily for species is not always going to be in fact very rarely we're going to be able to deliver net gain on site so then you have the question of what we can't do on site because the developer wants to maximise their profits that's the viability question what do we do well we look locally if there's a site to deliver the offset locally but what are we talking about we're talking about a site that has to be managed for 30 years that's going to be funded many parish councils aren't set up to do that kind of stuff they'd have to bring legals in across money and so the idea of having a strategic habitat bank within the district there's precedent for this already in law actually within the county there's precedent is that you can take the harm that's been incurred at site x and you can not just redress it but you can add the net gain in another location now I mentioned the lawton view as well what the lawton view tells us is we want bigger better connected sites if we had a policy that said okay in this location we've got this harm so we're going to do half an acre here and half an acre there it would be unmanagable now it might and this is where the rub comes politically that is an easier option it's easier to sell to your residents but from a scientific perspective in terms of will that habitat be there in 10 years will it will it actually be there in five years will it be you know gone um it's a much easier thing to do to put it into one location as a strategic offset site but I just importantly want to say that doesn't mean we're going to end up with urban developments which are just concrete because we haven't factored in the green infrastructure green infrastructure soft edges trees amenity grassland all the stuff that people need and want but the biodiversity element if you if you if you if you want you to put back watervolts you're not going to do it in the middle of eddington you know it's just not going to happen so there's there is balance and you know it will work itself out but I don't have a complete answer for you today but that's my best shot okay perhaps just to add to that because obviously so in terms of existing nature sites we have sites that are protected already so if they've got those levels of protection that obviously has a high degree of weight if you're on planning committee if you're talking about from that perspective that would be you know that would have high weight because obviously if there's something going through a SSI for example sites like special services so there aren't those that's a consideration that you'll be familiar with as a planning committee so that's something else you need to be aware of in terms of how you as a planning committee come to do that balance a lot of what we'll be dealing with because virtually every application from January onwards with possibly the exception of householders will have to go through this process of putting in an assessment telling us what's on the site and how it's how that biodiversity net gain that 10% plus is actually going to be met and where so it's it's quite a new and it's very exciting and the potential is great because of the amount of development we're also going to have within Greater Cambridge in due course you know it is quite huge areas and it's a huge landscape opportunity to make a significant difference but there will always be that weighing up which will be in your hands as members on planning committee it's another consideration that you have to have it's going to have a higher consideration which is mandatory 10% or it will be when it you know we come in in January but it will be for you to make that you know that judgment that's her the winner thank you so um thank you for the answer and and I think actually I know this is the the climate committee but it's important that planning committee members and subs are fully briefed on this ahead of it happening because I'll say we will be the ones that are doing that balance and and I'm just wondering whether part of the frustrations I've had in the past is we have planning committee they say they can do x y and z there they do x y and z but the maintenance isn't quite right and then actually what we find is it was they've ticked boxes they've said they've built just keeping it really simple they said they'd build 100 trees to replace the 20 trees but of course the trees like the A14 don't survive and I'm so having it in these strategic sites does that help with sort of the enforcement offers and how how long afterwards do we monitor the sites to ensure that we've not sort of to sort of um for longouts of red wrap sort of people doing things in a um economical fashion shall we say it's one of the obligations that comes with us to us as a council when we make those decisions will be that we have to monitor them so that will be a requirement so we will actually have to do reports back to deffra we haven't got the detail yet but we're using the system to actually show how many of these reports you know how many sites have we signed off what's the management plan so in reality and we've talked about here Jon's talked about lower valley farms that's the first section 106 we've now got in place and that requires them to put a 30 year management plan in place and the the methodology feel like that we've put in place is that that annual annual reports for the first five years which is off to where it's going to site to really getting established and our points of our ecologists will be out there every year checking you know what their report tells us whether that is on track to deliver that plan but also physically going on site to double check as well so we will have to do that it's quite hence the quite a big undertaking that is coming our way which is why we've got another ecologist already trying to get ahead to the cell so this will actually again excitingly but an opportunity you know make sure that we are important that because we absolutely recognise what you say about this is secure doesn't always often get implemented and often on the greener side of things from the tree so certainly in terms of ecology and nature we're quite hopeful because actually it's it's the the bone sports being caught in place through this new legislation it's going to give a stronger teeth as a and we're also expecting the developers also have to pay for that as well that's the other thing perhaps for say so actually there's a charging regime coming in so we're not any chart we'll be charging for the advice that we give as a pre-application stage but the monishing side of things they are paying and that in due course will pay for our ecologists so we've had to forward load it with a bit of money from Deffra but in due course the development should be paying for that monitoring and you've got the resources and the plans for the resources it's like to say it is something more so that we self financing essentially that's the plan at the moment also we've done quite how many you know this is new to us so we've tried to predict for the next few years but we've absolutely got a second ecologist so most of you will know Dan Weaver who works for South Camden and we've got Guy Belcher at the Cambridge City and we've just taken on Sharon or Sharon Serna Yardy as a second ecologist trying to get ahead and again to be fair to the government you know Deffra has funded most local authorities to do that so every local authority in the country wants ecologists at the moment might someone's happy with Deffra that's good I would just come in it was was very interesting in terms of the ecologists at an LGA meeting when the local authorities were saying they all needed ecologists and there weren't enough ecologists and they couldn't get ecologists to go to local authorities and I do remember an officer from this council standing up and saying well in South Cams they've come because they've got an amazing package in terms of work-life balance and we've got one of the ecologists in the country coming to South Cams because of the four-day working week that's very interesting that we were able to be more competitive across all local authorities for a very limited pool of ecologists so that's really good I can see that Councillor Warren Greene's got a hand up I have a question about on the really interesting report thank you on activities and actions you've also mentioned outcomes as going to be part of this and I think we've sort of like talked a little bit about how you're going to monitor it I'm just wondering at what point will we see what the criteria is you're measuring against what the outcomes are going to be my question is because my parishes ask me oh you know they can see this activity happening so it is visible which is great but it's what are the outcomes of the work that's being done at the moment so yeah I didn't really cover too much of that in my presentation I probably should have done it would have been much longer though so the monitoring if I could take Lowe Valley Farm just as the first because that's the first solid agreement that we have so I can speak much more like that's actually happening rather than a mind of it maybe the monitoring that we've agreed for that biodiversity offset site which should follow but for any other is it will be monitored for 30 years in years one two three four five 10 15 20 25 and 30 over those years the monitoring years we would expect the agent in this case because the county don't have their own that they're managing it through bidwells I'd like to say that yeah okay so bidwells will produce a report in the monitoring years which our ecologists will check not just through looking at Google Earth they'll go and visit the site they'll check the ground and they'll essentially test the the intention for the habitat it's progressed towards its desired goal so 30 years in about a 30 year woodland what a 30 year woodland is going to look like they will assess whether the trees are in good condition whether they died whether that and essentially what we've been told by the ecologists on site so bidwells will tell us here's your report we'll read it we'll check it do a site visit and we'll grade it we'll mark it if it's not good we'll feed back and they have to obligated they have to fix anything that's not as it should be so in terms of different habitat types as I think Councillor Carnes already said some habitats come to maturity much quicker than others would take a long time um whereas maybe grassland quicker so I don't think there's we can't say that well by year 10 we'll know it's all good we'll have a good indication of where things are by year 10 but maybe by year five we'll have a good indication of where the grassland's going so um the main point here I'm probably not making very well is that the local planning authority isn't just obligated to do this um we have to report back to DEFRA um on what we find and said again checks and balances locally checks and balances with national agencies and government to ensure um that what's taking place is being I think there was a question earlier about how's it going to be measured the DEFRA metric is the only acceptable approach it's not like um in the past developers have said well we've we've done some calculations on the back of the bag packet you know and we we think that it's this that and the other it can't do that anymore has to be this government mandate to talk the DEFRA metric so that's standardized the the timeline is standardized this is all wrapped up in a section 106 agreement it's about as watertight as it can get of course you're dealing with natural stuff so will it grow will it die you know will please be dead in five years if they are we'll know about it and then the agents and landowners will have to make sure that that's replaced and it actually is what they say it should be that that makes sense just to answer it'll be part of the measuring tools you start to put into place and in your report you have said you know you are going to be doing more um sort of measuring and um more technology around this so it'll be I'm going to look forward to seeing some of those outcomes coming through in that work thank you thank you there's a couple of things really but the um first of all regarding the ecologists uh actually I was secretary of the group of local authority colleges in britain for 20 20 years 30 years ago um and that time there were about 100 local authority ecologists in britain there was still an organization called the association or local government colleges which was the uh the successor of the one I was a a member of and hopefully they will now be able to encourage more the that is a role a professional role in the long term goal now secondly I wanted to talk about an experience something which I thought in context with time as one assesses how how this proceeds might be worth thinking about I worked in south wales and Glaworgan was the only county in britain at the time which had a private active farmland which allowed it to take when opencast development took place they could take a bomb over a coal development took took place which then at that time was quite active um they could take a a bond and if the site was not the main worry is that a company would go bus and then they they couldn't do the restoration afterwards and so they can have a condition which couldn't be delivered and they had a couple of really atrocious sites where that happened uh so they they they allowed to take a bond and if the the company went bus where it wasn't delivered they could go in and do it themselves with the money uh and it that worked very well and it was lost when they had the evolution because all the old acts were abandoned and didn't have it and now in any case nobody's developing coal but I thought it was an interesting parallel which might be of interest in the longer term um in terms of how you might manage um long term management of these sites because when you go long term management the same sort of risk that apply um um I thought it was interesting but it had to be done by a private active parliament which was a whole different procedure um so I just thought you might bear that in mind as a to think in the longer term not not immediately obviously how you see how it runs whether that might be a solution that could be adopted for for this sort of management um it's just a thought okay thank you um and cat the dip are you thank you chair um I was wondering whether a possible problem might emerge with this is that for the biodiversity offsetting um there might be a sort of optimal commercial solution if you like to to provide um the biodiversity net gain credits um but um combining that with other income streams for example you could imagine that Milton Country Park is is quite a good model because it's it's woodland it's got parts of people to walk their kids walk their dogs and it's got a cafe it's got a car park so if that were being built from scratch that that might be quite a sort of um interesting business model but um is there a danger that if that's the optimum point we end up with too many of those kind of places where and and we end up with no meadowland with three for pollinating insects for example okay so we're again a very interesting question um I think so with Milton Country Park I believe it's the only land the only significant land that we own as a as a council um I've just been sad on this morning um a presentation by planning a voluntary service on um how councils who own land can set up bng offset sites on that land and let me tell you it's very difficult to do because you have to set up arms length trading organized because otherwise we're marking our own work right and there's and there are rules about this um so local authorities that have land holdings and are using those for potential offset sites are having to jump through all kinds of hoops to ensure transparency to ensure um that you know it's it's in line with the with the legislation um much better I think better that term I can use much much better I'll use it anyway much better that someone else is taking the risk so with Low Valley Farm the county council own the land and for whatever reason they've decided to employ an agent to do that all the ecological baseline and monitoring work so we're in the sort of three-way agreement we have a section one of six agreement with the county which uh brings money to us uh for the the monitoring work that we do and covers the officer time the county take the risk if it all falls over and I don't know where bidwells are in it there until we buy the county and whatever agreement they've they've got but that's the model we seem to have um there I have often wondered about milton country park if it could be better used is that something I could say I'm not sure um but potentially used in a in a different way so it's a benefit biodiversity not just the sports side of things but yeah probably said too much advice Can I just come back quick from that? Yes chair I was really using milton country park as an example of something that could be created that would be viable as a business that would bring biodiversity net gain and other income streams so really my point was that if that's the optimum everyone would do that but we wouldn't get meadows full of you know food for pollinating insects for example because that's not as good a kind of business proposition in terms of utilising land for biodiversity net gain purposes I suppose there's a range of things happening I mean what we're talking about here it's to the planning act planning process and what needs to happen this way you've also got a whole range of players in great in canvassure so you've got wildlife bodies you've got um you know places like um you know the wildlife trust you've got CPF at Coated who are doing that and obviously they're yes they want they need to be commercial they need to be sustainable but actually they've got nature in in hearts so that you'll always have I think that aspect and actually from my point of I suppose the other things so I'm going to jump about a little bit um we've also got the nature recovery um strategy so actually in addition to what the what we're talking about as a county wide level there will be a plan coming into being which is very much got nature in its heart saying you know what have we got what should we do what we should be aiming so all of these things will come together so yes there may well be landowners that might wish to um you know make a business case from from nature effectively I suppose our role will be if that's offered to us for offset offset it can only be on the basis that of you know what what it's got to match what we've got what we need and what's for what's being lost on this site so that side of things will happen but there are other players in there um and actually you know we need we'll need a lot of this these sorts of sites there won't no one site will be sufficient so although we're very pleased that we've got this pilot with lower valley farm you know we are going to need considerable considerable number of those um thank you um councillor brian melons yes sure thank you um I've got a question um or um an observation about issues that came up recently in my um local district so we had a problem with a new development uh and the section 278 uh agreement with highways called for the removal of part of a hedgerow to allow visibility um onto the road adjacent to the new development and their requirement was to cut this hedgerow down to 200 millimeters which is very short and there was a bit of a public outcry over this um there was some peculiar issues that were raised because it was a de-restricted road uh but now is the 30 mile now zone and the this and the visibility display lengths have to be considerably larger for that so there was more of the hedgerow that had to be removed and what I was wanting to talk about uh very briefly was the relationship between um county council and our um newly acquired uh ecology officers in regard to biodiversity in that game and uh I really um advocate for a closer working relationship between the county highways team who instruct on these issues so that they can take biodiversity in that gain into serious account uh while demanding developers do certain activities that um actually create a loss of loss of nature uh or natural habitat um so that's really uh or um I'm just advocating a closer working relationship so that these issues are tackled ahead of time rather than after the event thank you thank you I can I can answer that um so the county do have an ecologist Deborah Armid who we meet with regularly um and in fact Deborah set up her a group of local authority ecologists and we meet to talk about well it's been biodiversity in that game actually mostly over the last year um and in those meetings um you know different issues are highlighted and everybody you know gets the chance to wear what's going on in their patch how it's joined up so absolutely take the point that working together with other local authorities where it was stronger were better informed and ultimately we have better outcomes um I would say on the county highways piece I've got to say something about that as well as recently there was um we identified an elm tree in Boxworth which was due to be felled by the county um and elm trees are this one's a particularly nice specimen um because it it was it had dropped limbs and it was deemed as a risk to this that and the other so uh our tree officer got involved we instructed the county to not chop the tree down we put a TPL on it I think we put a TPL a emerging TPL we had the tree tested for uh infection and it was found to be um decayed but not to the point where it needed to be taken down so this is this is the the point I'm making here probably poorly is that county were ready to swing the chainsaws and just make it happen because of the risk a perceived risk to the highway to to to life and limb but actually just a little bit of work and a little bit of further investigation revealed that we could keep the tree maybe do some crown reduction you know but keep the tree um so there is a there is a currently lack of join up even within and I can't I can't really it's not fair for me to speak for the county council I'm not a county council employee but I think that some will join up within that authority would be beneficial quite how we um facilitate that I'm not sure but um yeah so so on this if I can come back on that in the the officer involved at the uh Cambridge uh county is David Allard who is assistant director for highways and transport and he's written some notes up after a conversation following the incident that I referred to before so perhaps I can direct our officers to have that conversation with him the other thing that I briefly would like to say is you mentioned trees we've got a very good example um in the development of the genome campus where they are translocating live trees in quite large numbers and we've seen as well across our district and in in the city as well where uh there's been um much furory over the removal of trees for uh road developments um whereas rather than fell them actually translocating those trees to somewhere else uh or even alongside where they were previously is ought to be considered as a possibility of retaining those uh those mature trees that are so good for the environment thank you thank you very much for that councillor melden I think that would be especially around the hedgerows because in this committee we have looked again at how important hedgerows are and how we can through the planning system our own planning system but also highways I think this would be a key one um you know in particular I think at that time it was as whether or not this was nesting seasons that had all things being taken into account you know and what's great is we've now got you know communities and community members who are out there being the stewards and champions of this so I think it's it's internally to make sure that's that's um happening thank you very much councillors I would like to ask a you know a couple of questions and um Jane Green you mentioned this which is I think it's going back to the the legislation and I think as as councillor Heather Williams said you know there has been um have been warm words about DEFRA and we do think that we're going in the right direction here because before planning system just had no way of really making sure that environment was high up the agenda and in fact national Cambridge it was created to make sure that environment and nature were higher up the planning agenda with teeth and this brings the teeth in but when I talk to ecologists scientists experts in this area they really don't think 10% cuts it but 10% biodiversity net gain actually gets us to serious protection and gain that's why we've got 20% net gain and I notice in the report we've had today there wasn't the mention of 20% net gain um and you know what chance is there that we actually get a real a proper aspiration legally for something like 20% what are we going to do in that gap where where are our assurances as a council that we're putting 20% but the legal requirement is 10% so where's the confidence for people in our system that we say 20% but what's going to come out not November now but it's not going to be January and who knows whether it's January we hope it's January but what confidence can we give to our residents that when we say 20% we can require that in our new local plan obviously because we can't do it yet because nothing gives it but we we are doing everything we're finding a lot of developers are actually obliging so can we just have a bit more confidence around that I can I can speak a little bit to that um when so the policy team obviously responsible for developing new local plan policy and I think if I was to wind the clock back maybe a year or so the conversations we were having with them about evidence bases and about viability there was there was definitely some kind of like are you sure that we're you know 20% seems like a that's completely changed all the conversations that we're having with our policy colleagues now as they are developing the new local plan policies to be tested through the process or 20% there's there's no question I'm not hearing it I'm not getting the mood music from them but it's I'm achievable that they're concerned that the evidence won't support that so from my perspective the colleagues that I'm working with it's a given that's what we're going for without want to be doom and gloom but just to give you you know there's a process to be gone through members so actually your offices and policy are working not based they're very clear what your aspirations are that's their aim we have yet to go through the full local plan process and examination so you know just making it really clean there will be developers that will come to the table at that point it's the love you know perhaps a year plus off that will be challenging that decision if you know that's the decision that members make they will challenge it so your officers need to make sure they've got the evidence there that can demonstrate that so that's the process and this happens on every single aspect be it water be it you know your 20% target whatever that what's going on you'll be sure you're you know familiar with so so we're very clear and as officers in negotiation and a lot of a lot of the at the moment we've got our current local plan we know what you're what you're wanting as a members we're really clear now negotiators and developers that come in and say look yes we know what mandatory is or we know what the current situation is which is it's got to have some mitigation you know some some gain of it we know it's going to be 10% from on November January now but our members are here so we're having those conversations that because you know development takes a long time to actually get through a planning process believe them to develop into to move them so your officers are doing that um reasonably successfully is my sense I mean what we've been talking today about bng etc are tools because even if you have developers that actually want to do it well where can they do it etc so the other bit of work we're also doing is being proactive in finding out where are those sites that they could do so they can't do it on site so perhaps they can perhaps do 10% on site and they might need to do 10% elsewhere up until recently there haven't been those alternatives so we're actually also doing a lot of facilitating work and trying to promote so we're going to be doing some obviously more training with the planning committee um but we're going to be talking to the development industry we were talking yesterday with county farms to say well done great um going lower valley bomb what else is in the pipeline etc so again you know we're all trying our best as officers to make sure there is a pipeline of sites coming forward so that isn't either an excuse for the town of the line as well um but yes it's just to make sure that you know we're clearance officers what your aspirations are there's a process we need to go through through our local plan we're starting those messages now even though the local plan is you know will take some years um and also we're trying to put place you know tools in place or sites in place to enable that can I just and the next one will be around um so you mentioned the local nature recovery strategy we know that in this in the um spatial strategy alongside our emerging local plan that we did a call for green sites so we know that who wanted to sort of put forward green sites as well like Llofalfarn or whatever but also that there is the lower that became richer local nature recovery strategy is pretty mature has been incorporated but it has no material weight in planning so triple si's do no designated sites at the moment do but when you showed that map on there of our nature depleted area and there are these areas that are absolutely critical but actually don't have protection yet even though they're in the nature temperature um LNRS but what I heard was that recently in the lords there was um an agreement within the amendments to the environment bill to have it as a material consideration so the mpbf will be amended to link and give so that when you're in planning you have to take consideration of those sites that we are currently putting in our local plan for the local nature recovery strategy so it was just can we make sure that we're kind of what what the yeah what what actually comes out of the other end of the policy end when the environment bill can be because I think that's critical otherwise we've got so much time spent creating these areas the maps the whatever but in the end they have no weight but I think they're going to have weight which is really good I want to come back on this earlier comments about about about the replaceability of of sites again and the common for the maids for instance about chalk grassland replacing chalk grassland and in fact chalk grassland or calcareous grassland it's one of the most difficult for a place because it's generated literally over thousands of years it's to give you an example when I was when I was an undergraduate I was at Sussex and we went to look at Lullington Heath nature reserve local natural nature reserve which is an area of torque heathland but it included in an area within the national nature reserve which had been cultivated it's last been cultivated a hundred years ago but still it was not chalked down and it was completely different it was it was an old cultivated land so you can't just create that calcareous grassland it's the soils that matter and the soil has been completely it's been cultivated it's been destroyed so this is a factor that I think we do need to take account of in in terms of our policies that there are some habitats which are more difficult than others and calcareous grassland is probably the habitat which is the most hit in in this area it's it's in effect a man-made habitat but it's a man it's a man-made habitat that we really value and we've lost tremendous amount um so I think that in in terms of assessing our planning applications we somehow have to ensure that this this consideration can be taken into account and I don't quite how that might be involved in perhaps in a local plan perhaps in the comments but make make it clear that there are there's a there's a categorisation of the type of habitat and the importance that will be I think that's exactly what the local nature recovery strategies do so thanks thanks any more questions on this item no so we you know the recommendation is for us to note this and to applaud the work you're doing because we know in a way you're you're doing this at risk which means you know yes you've got the funding but you're actually putting all the work in applying for the funding setting things up like the data without knowing exactly what the rules are going to be so that we can be there and ready for it and and really we just want to say thank you for that and this is going to be a difficult area and it's somewhere where I think everybody is committed to to making sure that yeah we do double nature in this area and so we we actually do it right so thank you very much yeah and it'd be very nice to me on your apologies so if we go to the next item agenda which is a verbal update and this is on climate risk and adaptation so Alex I think you are going to thank you chair yes I propose a kind of short verbal update and I will bring back an update later on in the year so climate adaptation really means the adjustments in how kind of communities businesses and councils respond to the kind of actual climate change and the expected climate change to come and although there is kind of some crossover with aspects of mitigation when we're looking at that carbon reduction there are some kind of distinct areas as well so and their things around kind of climate resilient buildings preparing for sea level risk, flood protection, wildfires that kind of thing and this is a really a work area that informs both business continuity but it also supports that kind of policy development as well so a climate risk subgroup has been set up with all of the kind of climate need representations from the combined authority, the local authorities and planning authority colleagues as well and as well as NHS public health integrated care system policy sorry police and fire services as well. We had a kind of first initial workshop back in July just to kind of convene people to see the different kind of aspirations and the different kind of work that had been done to date by the different respective organisations and I think the kind of key findings were that there is this need for a kind of comprehensive and quantified evidence base and that will be beneficial for both the council and other local authorities because you know we're providing these vital services and we need to kind of make sure that there's the understanding of the risks from climate change to those services and a need for that kind of clear consistent and quantified evidence base so it was noted that you know there's been quite a lot significant areas of work done particularly around local plan and evidence base as well and lots of work focus around flood risk in particular. Having said that we the focus has been on responding to individual climatic events rather than actually looking at how that evolving business as usual service delivery happens and it's a slightly different kind of way of looking at things than I think we've done previously so there was that recognition that actually we need to kind of widen that focus. We had suggestions around you know how we might go about doing this and what is needed so a kind of further granularity of the data that we already have looking at different scenarios so for example you know adapting to 1.5 degree temperature increases right up to perhaps 4 degrees increase and looking at a range of kind of scenarios undertaking the evaluation of that data to inform the risk and then that will then inform the plans that kind of have to come from that as well and there were also kind of specific implications that we identified along the lines of things like supply chain risks so key supply chain risks what those localised impacts might be and how you might take a place-based approach and also thinking about the skills and the capacity that we need in order to do this work as well and to do the plans eventually. So a first phase was proposed to kind of gather that existing information identify the gaps and develop the kind of quantified evidence base so the group are looking at doing some soft market testing to think to kind of look at costs and think about how to scope and spec that piece of work and a request for funding has gone into the combined authority to kind of cover that work so the next steps are kind of really just to flesh out what that work looks like and we did identify that there's a range of stakeholders that need to be involved obviously it was just officers at that particular point but the next stage is to kind of proceed with that wider stakeholder engagement and kind of drawing up what that specification of work looks like so that we don't duplicate what we've already got and we actually add value to it so yeah so that's that's where we're at and I would propose bringing an update back in towards the kind of back end of this year. Any questions I can have to take those? As Alex said this is a bit dear to me so to me this is about the climate shocks that we can't avoid anymore so this is about the heat waves, the flooding, the fires, the sea level rise that is going to happen anyway now because of climate change and then the scenarios that you're talking about whether we're going to be in a one quite five degrees in one world or not or whatever we do now will impact what we're doing here locally nationally internationally will impact those scenarios but there are certain things that will just they're going to be happening now and they're already happening so the NHS health alert that was out this summer for the first time the NHS has a health alert that says because of the number of deaths due to heat stroke during the heat wave in 2020 the health alert says this is telling everybody that the NHS how much we might be overwhelmed due to the number of people who are suffering from heat stroke and with elderly people are particularly an unnon ventilated homes that could be those could be fatal and this is about we get the winter overwhelming of the NHS this NHS heat health alert that was out this summer people thought it was about oh put your thumb cream on it was a heat health alert for the NHS saying the NHS will be overwhelmed by this much because of extreme heat and they're going to be doing this and I think local authorities are on the front line constantly business of continuity but also through flooding it's the front you know it's the local authorities that are on that front line so when we've got our net zero strategy and we have our w nature I think there is a compliment that this comes in to say it's about reducing the carbon emissions and it's about what we're doing already to adapt and do those things and then we look at what we may do above over and above but first of all it's in what we're already doing and recognizing that already the council is doing stuff so all the action to support people with their energy bills insulation all that is adaptation to you know to climate change I think it's it's bringing that together within our integrated strategy and how we do that with not burdening too much but I think it's like you say it's a packaging of what's already being done there but the concern obviously and I have to say this is the rowing back of net zero stuff the number of people that have contacted me on that really concerned that we are going backwards on on net zero nationally and what we can do with this and businesses are also saying we had this all planned and now we're going backwards it makes it even more critical that we're working on what do we do with the stuff that we can't avoid because we're you know we're we're going slow but obviously we're going to make sure that we don't row back on net zero but you know that that's one of the things so the other thing I'd like to link in with it when you talk about business continuity is with the council has done work with our business support team looking at how businesses can green themselves and look at reducing emissions I think helping them know about risk and continuity so how can extreme weather events or lack of resources like water or you know other things affect their business continuity as risk once we've learned maybe that's something to share with our business you know the community as well yeah just to say I mean I think this piece of work that we do will be and you know incredibly useful for the public sector but then also to have that conversation with businesses and like we said that supply chain not just our supply chain but businesses supply chains as well and start to kind of well not start but kind of increase that conversation because we'll have that really clear localised evidence base about what it means for us here and we can then kind of communicate that to businesses as well so yeah definitely. Thanks any more so we just look forward when you come back with that one thank you very much good so we just go to date of the next meeting which will be Thursday 7th of December and we've already heard that part of that will be to hear the air quality strategy that city went to one of city's committees just this week and we're looking at an integrated air quality strategy between ourselves and city so we'll be looking at seeing that with them raising some of their air quality standards and thresholds so that will be one of the items as I understand it will be on the agenda committee. Yeah okay good thank you very much everybody thank you members thank you those online as well for all the preparation for this meeting.