To receive Notices of Motion submitted under Standing Order No.12
a) This Council recognises the contribution that solar power can make in moving Rushcliffe towards net zero carbon by means of solar power generation in/on new buildings, and also that it is possible to position, design, build and operate solar farms to produce valuable renewable energy in a way that benefits the community, biodiversity, wildlife, and recreational enjoyment of the countryside. However, Council also recognises the potential negative impacts of solar farms, for example in terms of loss of agricultural land, management methods that reduce biodiversity, restriction of movement of wildlife, loss of habitat variety, reduced recreational access to the countryside, negative impact on the landscape and openness of the countryside, and impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents.
Council will:
1. Before the next Local Plan, issue planning guidance to:
·maximise opportunities for solar power generation and energy efficiency in new buildings, in line with current Local Plan and National policies; and
·supplement Policy 16 of Local Plan Part 2 in terms of the location and design of solar farms to help ensure negative impacts are minimised.
2. In the next Local Plan:
·strengthen policies to achieve improved solar power generation and energy efficiency in new buildings; and
·advance the positive benefits of solar farms for the community, whilst protecting against the negative impacts.
3. Call on the government to strengthen national planning policies relating to solar power generation and energy efficiency in new buildings so that this does not rely on local policies.
Councillor C Thomas
b) Council recognises that use of chemical pesticides (including herbicides and insecticides) has the potential to harm the health of our residents and have negative impacts on the environment and biodiversity. Council resolves to:
1. Build on existing actions to reduce the use of pesticides in its own operations, replacing with less harmful alternatives over a three year period, except for a small list of permitted exceptions to be determined.
2. Work with partner organisations, including Nottinghamshire County Council, to influence their own use of the pesticides in public areas within Rushcliffe.
3. Conduct a public awareness campaign and otherwise use its influence to encourage the public and businesses in Rushcliffe to similarly eliminate the use of pesticides on their own land.
4. Include appropriate advisory notes in planning consents for residential developments which include public open spaces to incorporate construction management plans and ongoing management agreements for public open space which are similarly pesticide-free.
Councillor L Way
Minutes:
a. The following Notice of Motion was proposed by Councillor Thomas and seconded by Councillor R Mallender.
1. Before the next Local Plan, issue planning guidance to:
· maximise opportunities for solar power generation and energy efficiency in new buildings, in line with current Local Plan and National policies; and
· supplement Policy 16 of Local Plan Part 2 in terms of the location and design of solar farms to help ensure negative impacts are minimised.
2. In the next Local Plan:
· strengthen policies to achieve improved solar power generation and energy efficiency in new buildings; and
· advance the positive benefits of solar farms for the community, whilst protecting against the negative impacts.
3. Call on the government to strengthen national planning policies relating to solar power generation and energy efficiency in new buildings so that this does not rely on local policies.”
Councillor Thomas informed Council, in moving the motion, that in line with the Local Plan, the Council was providing development sites for new housing and employment for the Nottingham area. Council noted the vision of each new housing estate having the potential to become a mini power station by design, with solar power generation in mind. Newer technologies would also provide ways for other building materials to generate electricity. Councillor Thomas stated that the required infrastructure to link to the grid and provide battery storage could efficiently be added during the build, whilst at the same time, building design could maximise energy efficiency to reduce the energy each new home consumes. Unfortunately, none of this was happening because it was not a planning requirement, and the objective of developers was, understandably, to maximise the profit for their stakeholders not improve energy efficiency or electricity generation for longer term benefit. Councillor Thomas went on to highlight that in the meantime Rushcliffe’s green fields were being identified as locations for huge solar farms, to generate profit for a different group of developers. There was no question that this country needed to develop renewable energy sources, but it was also possible to build solar farms that sat well in the landscape without disrupting residents and the environment. Regrettably, if badly designed, these could also be obtrusive, ugly, disruptive, and damaging to wildlife, habitats, and biodiversity.
Councillor Thomas stated that resolving this issue would require work locally, and parts one and two of the motion covered what the Council could do here in the Borough, and nationally, and the third part of the motion related to the need for central government to act. However, Councillor Thomas shared her concerns that the next Local Plan was currently someway off, and action was required sooner. Council was advised that scrutiny into alternative energy sources had been scheduled but not until September 2022, due to concerns over officer workloads. Councillor Thomas concluded by expressing her concern that this would be too late and that by investing time in setting clear policies, the Council would save officer time in the long run as well as making its intentions in this area clear.
Councillor R Mallender seconded the motion and informed Council that the average energy consumption in the UK is about 30gigawatts per hour, with about 30% generated from fossil fuels, around 16% from nuclear power, 7% from biomass, with the remaining quarter being generated from renewable sources. Whilst this is a distinct improvement on the figures from 10 years ago, there was room for improvement. In principle, solar panels were a good idea, but poor use was made of the available. Council noted that by putting solar panels on roofs, beautiful green countryside in the Borough was being protected, whilst creating an easy way to help tackle climate change.
Councillor Edyvean informed Council that he, and his party, supported the sentiment behind the motion, which was why, as a Council, so much was already being done. The Council’s Local Plan already contained references to sustainable and renewable energies such as solar and wind technologies. The Council was in the process of creating a Supplementary Planning Document specifically related to solar energy and Councillor Edyvean reminded Council that whatever was done locally needed to be in line with national policy; indeed, the Council had been instrumental in pushing for design guidance across the county and would continue to work on that moving forward. The development at Abbey Road highlighted the Council’s ambition in this area at a level that it could influence and control. Councillor Edyvean also informed Council that alternative energies including solar would be scrutinised at the Growth and Development Scrutiny Group later this year. In summary, Councillor Edyvean highlighted that the Council was already working towards achieving much of what was contained within the motion and, therefore, he could not see what else could be done at this stage.
Councillor Gaunt stated that the standard of housing being built was not fit for purpose to be environmentally sustainable and the government should be lobbied to reinstate previous legislation that had required all new housing be net zero by 2015. Councillor Gaunt considered that seven years had been lost and this motion at least showed the Council’s intent to move forward on this issue.
Councillor Jones understood the reasons behind Councillor’s Thomas’ motion and told Council that he felt these were an improvement on current levels of activity and existing policy. He concluded by saying that it was very disappointing that this motion was being seen as negative.
Councillor Clarke reported to Council that he fully supported the passion and sentiment of Councillor Thomas’ motion but also understood, as Councillor Edyvean had said, that action was already being taken by the Council to address those concerns. Councillor Clarke stated that the wording in the motion was too vague, and he offered to meet with Councillor Thomas, and any other Councillors that wished to be involved, informally before this item came to scrutiny to discuss more practical and implementable solutions to bring forward.
Councillor R Walker thanked Councillor Thomas for her motion as it brought an important issue to the attention of Council, as residents in his ward were feeling particularly threatened by the potential for large swathes of local land to be changed from beautiful countryside into solar farms. Councillor Walker reported that he did not think the motion would do enough, or that the proposed scrutiny would be enough, and so he welcomed Councillor Clarke’s offer, as he felt that it was important to start somewhere.
Councillor Barney reported to Council that he had met with Councillors R Walker and R Mallender about this topic recently in relation to a current application in the Borough for a solar farm. Council noted that Councillor Barney would be taking Councillor Clarke up on his offer in the hope that the decision-making process can be made fairer, more rational and with the best interests of residents at its heart.
Councillor Thomas expressed her disappointment that the motion would not be supported.
On being put to the vote, the motion was lost.
b. The following Notice of Motion was proposed by Councillor Way and seconded by Councillor Gowland.
Council was informed that Councillor Way was unable to attend Council to present her motion and asked for leave to allow Councillor Thomas to present it on her behalf. The meeting consented.
Prior to presenting the motion Councillor Thomas informed the Mayor that she wished to make a small alteration under Standing Order 14 (highlighted in italics below). After outlining the alteration, consent was given by Council and Councillor Thomas proceeded to move the motion.
“Council recognises that use of chemical pesticides (including herbicides and insecticides) has the potential to harm the health of our residents and have negative impacts on the environment and biodiversity. Council resolves to:
1. Build on existing actions to reduce the use of pesticides in its own operations, replacing with less harmful alternatives over a three year period, except for a limited list of permitted exceptions to be determined.
2. Work with partner organisations, including Nottinghamshire County Council, to influence their own use of the pesticides in public areas within Rushcliffe.
3. Conduct a public awareness campaign and otherwise use its influence to encourage the public and businesses in Rushcliffe to similarly eliminate the use of pesticides on their own land.
4. Include appropriate advisory notes in planning consents for residential developments which include public open spaces to incorporate construction management plans and ongoing management agreements for public open space which strive to be similarly pesticide-free.”
In moving the motion, Councillor Thomas informed Council that according to the World Health Organisation there were over 1000 different pesticides in use around the world, there was increasingly compelling evidence that a wide range of pesticides might be harmful to human health, and that several other local authorities had already taken steps to limit pesticide use or stop using pesticides altogether. After outlining the dangers of pesticide use to children, pets, and the biodiversity of the Borough, Councillor Thomas reminded Councillors about the commitments made in the Nature Conservation Strategy and recognised that the Council was already taking action to reduce chemical use. This motion asked the Council to commit to ensuring that, within a three-year period, pesticides were only used in very limited circumstances. Councillor Thomas went on to provide detail on other areas of the motion, such as the Council using its communications channels to influence other users of pesticides in the Borough, including local businesses and residents, and the potential of using planning conditions to control the use of pesticides on new housing developments by developers or subsequent management companies. Councillor Thomas concluded by saying that she understood that it may not be possible to discontinue all pesticide use but that this should be restricted to areas where all other attempts have failed.
Councillor Gowland seconded the motion and reserved the right to speak.
Councillor Brennan informed Councillors that the Council had already demonstrated commitment to this important agenda and was working towards minimising pesticide use through the Nature Conservation Strategy adopted at Cabinet in February 2021. Councillor Brennan agreed that it was not possible to have a blanket ban on pesticide use as there were instances where their use was necessary but believed that it was possible for the Council to make a wider commitment to reduce overall pesticide usage in the Borough, and although there were no easy answers it was incumbent on everyone to try and minimise their use. Council was advised that the Conservative Party would be supporting the motion to extend the commitment of the Council to reduce pesticide use, including the development of a limited list of exceptions, as well as working with partners and contractors to find alternative means of control, and use Rushcliffe Reports and the Council’s social media channels to inform residents of the perils of pesticide use. Unfortunately, the Council could not use planning conditions to control the actions of developers and management companies but would commit to using its influence where it could.
Councillor Jones expressed his support for the motion, informed Council about his own personal commitment to reduce pesticide use and stated that he was particularly pleased to see that the motion contained measures to increase resident awareness and encourage change beyond the reach of the Council.
Councillor R Mallender explained that much needed to be done to educate residents, as well as the Council leading by example in its own operations, as well as influencing contractors and other users and he would be happy to support the motion.
Councillor Bailey informed Council that as well as damaging the environement, pesticides could also have a detrimental effect on non-target species leading to even greater damage. Councillor Bailey reiterated that alternatives did exist and welcomed the measures in the motion and suggested that consideration be given to this as an item for the town and parish council forum, as she felt they also had a part to play in this change.
Councillor Gowland expressed disappointment that the language in the motion had been modified to be less specific but welcomed the support that the motion had received from both sides of the Council Chamber. She stressed the Council’s role in leading this change and looked forward to progess being made.
Councillor Thomas stated that she was heartened by the support, as Councillor Way would be and reiterated that the way forward was to use pesticides in excetional circumstances, rather than as the norm.
On being put to the vote, the motion was carried.