Planning Service Annual Monitoring Report 2020 to 2021

Introduction

Content of the report

This Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) reviews the effectiveness of planning policy implementation and service delivery with a focus on the year April 2020 to March 2021. In this regard it provides a comprehensive review of the work of the Planning Service and how its different teams add value to Surrey.

The report assesses progress in preparing Surrey's minerals and waste local development documents. It also measures the performance of the adopted development documents against their strategic objectives and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Data is provided to support these assessments from minerals and waste planning applications and decisions, monitoring and enforcement activity, and progress with the restoration of mineral sites.

Progress against the Key Performance Indicators is reported using a 'traffic light' system:

This year's AMR does not contain maps of minerals and waste sites as these are now available on our Minerals and Waste Safeguarding web page, but it does contain a list of active mineral and waste sites in Appendix 3. Detailed information and analysis relating to policy implementation has been summarised and included within the minerals and waste chapters.

It should be noted that during the monitoring period reported in this AMR (April 2020 to March 2021), the Surrey Waste Plan (SWP) 2008 (SWP 2008) was still part of the Development Plan. On 8 December 2020, Surrey County Council adopted the Surrey Waste Local Plan 2019 to 2033 (SWLP). Consequently, planning applications determined between April 2020 and December 2020 were assessed against the SWP 2008. The next AMR (April 2021 to March 2022) will review the effectiveness of policy implementation and service delivery in relation to the SWLP.

Adding value

Supporting the minerals industry

The minerals industry is a key enabling sector of the UK economy, making up the largest element of the construction supply chain and supplying materials to other industries. Minerals and other aggregates are essential to the building of homes, commercial and industrial buildings, schools, and hospitals as well as utility and transport network improvements. For illustration purposes, it is estimated that the minerals industry (excluding oil and gas) contributed over £5.8 billion in Gross Value Added (GVA) in 2018 [footnote 1] and provided direct employment of around 81,000 people. The annual turnover for the Minerals and Minerals Products Industry in the UK for 2018 was £16 billion.

Our Planning Service supports Surrey's economy and the minerals industry through preparing and maintaining an up-to-date minerals local plan and by positive and proactive development management. Benefits of this approach include:

• Facilitating a steady supply of minerals that are vital to the UK economy;
• Safeguarding mineral resources and infrastructure from other forms of development;
• Enabling the identification and potential exploitation of oil and gas energy resources thereby facilitating the process of transition to a clean energy future.

Approximately 251 million tonnes of primary and recycled aggregates were produced in the UK during 2018 [footnote 1]. The industry (excluding oil and gas) directly contributed over £5.8 billion in GVA to the economy in 2018 and provided direct employment of around 81,000 people. The annual turnover for the Minerals and Mineral Products Industry in the UK for 2018 was £16 billion.

Supporting the waste management industry

The UK's waste management industry was valued at approximately £7 billion in 2013 and supports 103,000 jobs [footnote 2]. These figures rise to £41 billion in value and 672,000 jobs if you include opportunities in repair, reuse and leasing activity that are associated with extending the life of products.

The value that can be extracted from waste has increased in recent years. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has reported an increase in Gross Value Added (GVA) per tonne of waste managed in the UK from £32 to £43 between 2004 and 2012. The UK waste industry is growing at a faster rate than the wider economy.

However, the waste management industry continues to face some uncertainty as a result of Brexit including fluctuating prices and changes in environmental and waste management legislation, regulations and policy, much of which originated from the European Union (EU).

Surrey County Council's Planning Service supports the economy and the waste management industry through preparing and maintaining an up-to-date waste local plan and by positive and proactive development management. Benefits of this approach include:

• Facilitating the provision of the right types of waste management facilities in the right place and at the right time;
• Increased resource efficiency;
• New growth and employment opportunities from an expanding re-use, repair, recycling and re-manufacturing sector.

Helping to deliver schools and other infrastructure

Surrey County Council determines applications for its own development [footnote 3]. Its Development Management Team in the Planning Service is responsible for assessing planning applications relating to the County Council's own development, including the delivery of its school expansion programme and other developments including transport infrastructure, facilities for adult social care and fire stations. The team also provides detailed pre-application advice relating to these proposals ensuring that all relevant planning issues are addressed at the earliest possible stage, minimising the risk of delay to planning decisions and infrastructure provision.

In 2020/2021 during the Coronavirus Pandemic the Planning Service had to quickly adapt to ensure all of its services could be accessed online, as officers were required to work remotely for most of this period. This adaption was achieved speedily and efficiently, and the Development Management Team continued to be very busy providing pre-application advice and dealing with planning applications for a mixture of new developments, some of which are summarised in the table below:

Towards the end of 2020/21, the Development Management Team worked with the education service on several new facilities for pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) across the county. In the past five years, there has been a significant rise in demand for specialist places for pupils with Complex Social Communication Needs (CSCN) and Autism. Surrey County Council is committed to a major new programme which will improve the outcomes for young people and reduce the number of SEND pupils who will need to be placed in schools within the Non-Maintained and Independent sector.

All planning proposals are determined in accordance with the relevant planning policies of the District/Borough within which the development is located. Development Management Officers therefore need to be familiar with the planning policies and plan-proposals of the 11 individual Districts and Boroughs in Surrey. Planning applications always include consideration of a number of issues which need to be taken into account and balanced, including the interests of the local community. Issues such as traffic, ecology, heritage, Green Belt, amenity of neighbours, noise and flood risk will often arise during the consideration and determination of planning applications.

Many of the planning permissions issued by Surrey County Council will be subject to conditions requiring further details to be submitted to and approved by Surrey County Council. These may cover a wide range of issues including measures to manage traffic impacts, deliver landscape and ecological mitigation, protect against flood risk and secure use of sustainable construction and drainage techniques. A significant element of the team's work has therefore been to ensure the monitoring of these conditions, ensuring the submission of the details required, and the processing of the resulting applications.

Protecting Surrey's environment

Surrey as a county offers a rich and diverse array of landscapes and hosts a variety of habitat types. Geology, landform, land use and climate combine to determine the vegetation cover of the different parts of the county, which, in turn, creates specific landscape types, such as heathland, woodland and chalk grassland.

Surrey is host to two Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs), which are landscapes of national importance, comprising the whole of the Surrey Hills AONB, and part of the High Weald AONB. In total seven distinct landscape character types are encountered across the county, including the Thames Valley character type, the Thames Basin Heaths character type, the Thames Basin Lowlands character type, the North Downs character type, the Wealden Greensand character type, the Low Weald character type, and the High Weald character type.

Surrey also hosts numerous areas that have been designated for protection because of their nature conservation interest. At an international level the county hosts two Ramsar Sites, and at a European level three Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and four Special Protection Areas (SPAs). At a national level the county hosts three National Nature Reserves (NNRs) and sixty-three Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). At a county level, there are nearly 800 Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCIs).

Surrey is a popular place to live and work with a vibrant and diverse economy, which can lead to competing demands for land, particularly around the county's numerous settlements. For the planning system a key challenge is achieving a balance between the protection of sensitive and irreplaceable environmental assets, and the needs of the community and the economy for physical development.

Surrey County Council has statutory duties covering the environmental assessment of projects and plans. Consequently, Surrey County Council's Planning and Environment Teams brought together expertise on development planning, ecology, landscape and environmental assessment.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is required for certain types of development. Surrey County Council responds to screening opinion requests which determine if EIA is required, scoping opinion requests which define the scope of the information to be provided where EIA is needed and evaluates the quality of submitted Environmental Statements. The information set out in Environmental Statements is considered when planning decisions are made in relation to planning applications for 'EIA development'.

Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) and Sustainability Appraisals (SAs) are required to support the preparation of development documents, including those covering minerals and waste management development. SEAs may also be required for other Surrey County Council plans and strategies such as local transport plans and local flood risk management strategies. Further areas of work include the preparation of SEA screening and scoping reports, the SEA and SA of emerging plans and preparation of the associated reports, and the preparation of post-adoption statements.

Subject to capacity, Surrey County Council makes its environmental assessment service available to other Local Planning Authorities (LPAs). To date services provided have included EIA screening support and advice, Environmental Statement reviews, officer training, and bespoke advice on EIA and SEA/SA matters.

Surrey County Council's ecology and landscape specialists seek to protect and enhance Surrey's environment working with partners in the following ways:

• Commenting on and assessing planning applications submitted to Surrey County Council and providing advice on the policies proposed for inclusion in the development documents prepared by Surrey County Council, and by district and borough councils (BC) in Surrey. This advice enables the planning authorities to make decisions based on expert advice and up-to-date information.
• Providing advice and guidance to Surrey County Council planning officers and to applicants on the information required to make decisions, together with the formats, templates and standards that should be used such Ecological Impact Assessments (EcIA) and Landscape and Ecology Management Plans (LEMPs).
• Working with the Biodiversity Working Group of the Surrey Nature Partnership to produce and implement Biodiversity Opportunity Area (BOA) policy statements and policies and procedures for the identification and selection of Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCIs) in Surrey.
• Working with Surrey's district and borough councils and other partners to conduct surveys of Surrey including the revision of the Ancient Woodland Inventory and a Landscape Character Assessment [footnote 4];
• Working with Surrey's district and borough councils to survey and identify Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCIs) and collect data on the state of these for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) as part of the Single Data List (SDL) [footnote 5]. The results for the last reporting round in September 2018 found 49% of SNCIs were in positive management, the same as the previous year, although there were some changes in the qualifying sites.
• Responding to consultations on matters including Biodiversity Net Gain and Conservation Covenants.
• Three Surrey County Council owned spaces, at Bisley Common, Valley End (Chobham Place Woods) and Little Heath Common, have been designated Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspaces (SANGs) enabling housing development in the Thames Basin Heaths area and enhancing site management and the visitor experience.

Policies in the Surrey Minerals Plan and the Surrey Waste Local Plan help to protect the environment and communities from adverse impacts from minerals and waste management development. Protection is also added through monitoring and enforcing planning conditions imposed on mineral and waste management planning permissions and acting against breaches of planning control.

Valuing Surrey's heritage

Surrey has many heritage assets that require careful stewardship. Working to preserve and enhance Surrey's historic environment, Surrey County Council's Historic Environment Planning Team provides advice, guidance, and support to help create a positive resident and visitor experience of Surrey, maintain a sense of local distinctiveness and belonging, and to encourage businesses and tourists to the county. The team also administers and maintains the county Historic Environment Record, and provides expert advice to Surrey's planning authorities, developers, archaeological contractors and other stakeholders.

Although it is difficult to measure precisely, during 2020 and despite the national Coronavirus protocols and lockdowns, Surrey's district and borough councils registered around 22,000 applications, with nearly 1,000 archaeological consultations being made to Surrey's Historic Environment officers who in turn made 341 subsequent recommendations for archaeological work to be carried out. This means that around 4.5% of all Surrey planning applications involved potential archaeological concerns, but only just over 1.5% received a recommendation for a planning condition to be imposed on a planning permission or were informed that there was the need for further archaeological consideration. Discussion nationally has often characterised archaeological work as possibly being onerous to developers, but these figures indicate that Surrey operates a low-impact and well-targeted system for screening and identifying archaeological issues within the planning process.

To ensure compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) information requirements, Surrey's Historic Environment team's review of the 1990 local archaeological designations was completed in 2017 and distributed to the district and borough councils.

As a result, 2.5% of Surrey is now covered by an archaeological designation – an increase from the previous 1.8% which is largely the result of having better and more complete historic environment information than in 1990. This should mean that the planning system in Surrey will be even more proficient at identifying archaeological risks for developers. Work has already commenced on a timetabled review of these areas, which is due in 2022.

Surrey's Historic Environment team also continues to provide advice services to two local planning authorities in West Sussex, which has been ongoing since 2015. During 2020 the team was successful in securing nearly £70,000 of funding from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) to update and revise the Local Lists of six district and borough partner authorities. Local Lists usually comprise a list of built heritage assets that are of local character, but which may not meet the highly stringent criteria necessary for national designation. The Local Listing Project to be carried out during 2021-2022 will enhance these lists and for the first time will include assets of community value, as well as those with archaeological, cultural and historic significance.

For further information relating to the work that is carried out by Surrey's Historic Environment team.

Case study: Linden Farm, Alfold

An Archaeological evaluation was conducted at Linden Farm, Alfold prior to the construction by Surrey County Council of a supported living complex for young adults with autism. This work revealed medieval or early post-medieval activity including a number of substantial ditches.

Subsequent investigation showed that the area had been heavily terraced and initially, only ephemeral traces of pits and gullies were recorded with the sparse amount of pottery recovered suggesting a medieval date. During deeper excavations required to facilitate drainage works the extent of the large ditches recorded during the evaluation was further revealed. Water ingress and the limited nature of the excavations made detailed archaeological excavation and recording difficult but the ditches, when planned, formed a sub-rectangular ringwork measuring c 45m north--south, x 45m east--west. Dendrochronological (tree-ring) analysis of structural timbers recovered from the base of the ditches produced felling dates in the early twelfth century. Pottery dates confirm significant activity at that period, although modern truncation appears to have removed much of the primary occupation evidence.

Extrapolated data from the archaeological work, can, with a slightly lesser degree of confidence, be used to postulate a second substantial enclosure ditch or bailey attached to or enclosing an area on the western side of the ringwork. The combined evidence suggests that the investigations have revealed a previously unknown Norman ringwork and bailey castle site that initial documentary research suggests lay within 'Alfold', a detached portion of the Domesday Book estate of Shalford, held by Robert de Watteville. Such structures were the precursors to the larger and more familiar castles that the Norman conquerors erected in the immediate aftermath of 1066 to consolidate their victory. The strategically significant sites went on the be converted into formidable fortified complexes. Others fell rapidly out of use, with the site at Alfold appearing to be one of these latter examples that had since passed into obscurity, as the structure appears to have been relatively short-lived. The site is now preserved beneath the completed assisted living development.

Footnotes

[Footnote 1] Minerals Product Association (2020) Profile of the UK Minerals Products Industry.

[Footnote 2] Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (2015) 'Resource management: a catalyst for growth', London, UK

[Footnote 3] Under Regulation 3 of the Town & Country Planning General Regulations 1992.

[Footnote 4] In 2016/2017 the Surrey Landscape Character Assessment was used as the landscape evidence base for reviewing a number of Local Plans and the Surrey Waste Local Plan.

[Footnote 5] SDL 160-00 Proportion of local sites where positive conservation management is being or has been implemented.

Policy

Development plan documents

Surrey County Council's full set of Development Plan Documents (DPDs) comprise:

• Surrey Waste Local Plan 2019 to 2033 adopted 8 December 2020.
• Surrey Minerals Plan Core Strategy DPD adopted 19 July 2011.
• Surrey Minerals Plan Primary Aggregates DPD adopted 19 July 2011.
• Aggregates Recycling Joint DPD for the Minerals and Waste Plans adopted 12 February 2013.

The Surrey Waste Local Plan 2019 to 2033 (SWLP) and the Surrey Minerals Plan 2011 (SMP) provide certainty for the minerals and waste management industries, for local communities and the wider business community, by identifying suitable locations for minerals or waste development throughout the county.

The Surrey Waste Local Plan 2019 to 2033 (SWLP), the Surrey Minerals Plan Core Strategy, Primary Aggregates and Aggregates Recycling DPDs (collectively referred to as the Surrey Minerals Plan 2011 (SMP)) provide certainty to the minerals and waste management industries, local communities and other stakeholders, by identifying suitable locations for minerals or waste management development throughout the county.

The SWLP covers the plan period of 2019 to 2033. The plan helps to ensure that the future waste needs of Surrey can be appropriately met through waste management facilities situated in the most suitable locations and with minimal impact on communities and the environment.

Up to date development documents are essential in order to provide a robust policy framework to facilitate the sustainable supply of minerals and management of waste. Minerals and waste local plans must be positively prepared to facilitate economic development in an environmentally acceptable manner.

Other local development plan documents

In addition to the above policy documents the following are also included in what is known collectively as the Minerals and Waste Development Framework (MWDF):

• Minerals Site Restoration Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) adopted 19 July 2011.
• Minerals and Waste Development Scheme (MWDS) agreed on 24 November 2020.
• Statement of Community Involvement adopted October 2019.
• Annual Monitoring Reports and associated annual Local Aggregate Assessments (LAA). [footnote 6]

Emerging policy

Surrey County Council as the Minerals and Waste Planning Authority (MWPA) is required to update development plans to ensure that they contain robust and effective policy.

During 2020/21 preparatory work was initiated in respect of Surrey's first joint Minerals and Waste Local Plan (MWLP). This plan will provide a development framework for both minerals and waste management development. It was decided to produce a joint plan so that strategic issues can be addressed in a manner that considers cross-discipline synergies and provides for policy consistency where appropriate and other efficiencies.

The first formal phase of preparing the MWLP – the Issues and Options Public Consultation – commenced in November 2021 and closed in March 2022. The next step in preparing the MWLP will be the Preferred Options Public consultation (Draft Plan) within the timescales set by Surrey County Council's Minerals and Waste Development Scheme.

Minerals and waste development scheme

The latest Minerals and Waste Development Scheme (MWDS) was agreed on 24 November 2020. The MWDS is Surrey County Council's public statement of its programme for preparing policy documents.

Statement of community involvement

Surrey County Council's Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) outlines how the MWPA will involve the local community and other stakeholders in the preparation of minerals and waste plans for Surrey. The document also sets out how the council will involve communities and other stakeholders in determining applications for minerals, waste management, and Surrey County Council's own development. The current SCI was adopted in October 2019.

Footnotes

[Footnote 6] The requirement for Mineral Planning Authorities to prepare a Local Aggregate Assessment stems from guidance set out in paragraph 213 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

Duty to cooperate and working in partnership

Introduction

This chapter outlines Surrey County Council's cooperation with other planning authorities and public bodies to address strategic cross-boundary issues and to fulfil the Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities statutory Duty to Cooperate (DtC) obligations.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) July 2021, paragraphs 24-27 provide more detail around the DtC [footnote 7].

Duty to cooperate

As part of fulfilling the DtC, the MWPA participates in a number of officer and technical working groups that meet on a regular basis. At the Surrey-wide level these groups include:

• Surrey Planning Officers' Association (SPOA) which brings together senior officers to deal with a range of planning issues that have cross-boundary impacts and to explore opportunities for joint working.
• Surrey Development Managers' Group which focuses on development management practice and the interpretation of policy.
• Planning Working Group (PWG) which deals with cross-boundary policy issues and prepares joint responses to consultations of Surrey-wide interest including changes to national planning policy and on the London Plan. Surrey County Council provide the secretariat for this group.

At the national, regional, and sub-regional level the groups include:

• The South East Waste Planning Advisory Group (SEWPAG) which aims "to help waste planning authorities in the area to fulfil the Duty to Cooperate on strategic issues enshrined in the Localism Bill….". The MWPA is the budget holder for this group.
• The South East England Aggregates Working Party (SEEAWP) which advises the Government, mineral planning authorities and the minerals industry on mineral planning issues. SEEAWP provides a forum for cooperation across regional boundaries to address aggregate supply issues in the southeast.
• Planning Officers Society (POS) where the MWPA contribute to and participate in various groups at national and regional level.
• The County Enforcement Officers Group (CEOG) which enables discussions on waste and mineral enforcement issues with speakers from partner organisations.
• Wider South East Officer Working Group which supports the Wider South East Summits and Wider South East Political Steering Group to collaborate on strategic planning policy and investment across London, East of England, and the South East.
• Heathrow Strategic Planning Group (HSPG) which brings together local authorities and Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in the Heathrow sub-region. A non-statutory Joint Spatial Planning Framework was produced in 2020.
• Gatwick Diamond Local Authority Planning Officers which brings together local authorities in the Gatwick Diamond and enables discussion on shared and cross-boundary planning and infrastructure matters.

As part of the process of constructive and active engagement, the Minerals and Waste Planning Authority also responds to DtC consultations from other minerals and waste planning authorities. Details for 2020 to 2021 are provided in Table 1.

Strategic planning

In July 2014, Surrey Leader's Group agreed to establish a Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Partnership to facilitate joint working across the county to address strategic issues and deliver on strategic priorities. The Partnership agreed Interim Local Strategic Statement for Surrey 2016 - 2031 (PDF) (LSS) in February 2018 following consultation with partners. In recognition of changes to national planning policy since the LSS was originally proposed and LEPs being charged with preparing Local Industrial Strategies, it was agreed in June 2018 that Surrey Leaders and Chief Executives should develop a growth vision and strategy for Surrey as a whole to take forward the LSS into an agreed long term spatial strategy for Surrey (and sub-county areas), setting out key strategic opportunities, including infrastructure and economic priorities: Surrey's 2050 Place Ambition. The Place Ambition is currently being refreshed with an accompanying Implementation Framework.

SPOA and PWG worked with consultant AECOM during 2015/16 to prepare an infrastructure study for the county on behalf of the Surrey local authorities as part of the evidence base for the Local Strategic Statement. This provided a 'snap-shot' in time as of July 2015, reflecting the position in terms of anticipated growth patterns to 2030 and the infrastructure needed to support such growth including transport, schools, health and social care, community facilities green infrastructure, flood defences, waste, utilities and emergency services. The Surrey Infrastructure Study (2017) reflects the updated position as of June 2017 based on revised growth projections over the period 2016 to 2017 to 2030 to 2031. In 2020 to 2021 the Surrey local authorities worked with consultant ARUP to produce a Surrey Infrastructure Plan. This includes a prioritization framework to help determine 3 categories of projects depending on the stage a scheme has reached. A number of waste management projects are currently identified. The Plan will be reviewed regularly.

As part of the engagement with the Mayor on the full review of the London Plan, the Wider South East Officer Working Group considered key strategic issues including the minerals and waste issues in London and the wider southeast.

In 2020, HSPG produced a non-statutory Joint Spatial Planning Framework (JSPF) to respond to growth at Heathrow Airport. This was supported by a Joint Evidence Base and Infrastructure Study which includes waste infrastructure in the sub-region. HSPG is currently considering whether to update the evidence and review the JSPF.

Consultation protocol

Our Consultation Protocol was produced in cooperation with officers from the district and borough councils, and sets out how we will work together constructively to ensure mineral and waste management safeguarding issues are considered during the preparation of local plans and in the determination of planning applications.

Minerals and waste management safeguarding issues can arise when district and borough local plans are prepared and when planning applications are submitted.

Local Plan consultations allow a more comprehensive review of safeguarding issues where they relate to potential and proposed site allocations.

During 2020 to 2021 Surrey County Council provided mineral and/or waste related comments to the following Surrey district and borough councils during the preparation of their local plans:

• Guildford BC Local Plan: development management policies - Issues and Preferred Options consultation.
• Mole Valley DC Local Plan: sites in Minerals Safeguarding Area.
• Spelthorne BC: Spelthorne Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

In 2020 to 2021. Surrey County Council objected to four applications on minerals and waste management safeguarding grounds.

In 2020 to 2021. Surrey County Council commented on 29 safeguarding consultations within Surrey district and boroughs.

Surrey County Council commented on three neighbourhood plan consultations in 2020 to 2021.

Table 1: Summary of Duty to Cooperate consultations received from other minerals/waste planning authorities in2020 to 2021.

Footnotes

[Footnote 7] National Planning Policy Framework, July 2021.

Surrey Minerals Plan

Highlights

• Sales of recycled aggregates decreased by 37.5% to 0.6 million tonnes in 2020, which remains below the Surrey Minerals Plan target of 0.9 million tonnes by 2026.
• At the end of 2020, the total landbank of primary aggregates (land-won sand and gravel) was 8.7 years which is above the national policy requirement of at least 7 years.
• The Surrey Minerals Plan sets out the average provision rate of 1.4 million tonnes per annum of land-won sand and gravel, which should meet future demand for primary aggregates until 2026.
• Sales of primary aggregates increased some 7% to 0.76 million tonnes in 2020.

Due to the ongoing Coronavirus pandemic, some operators were unable to return aggregates monitoring data for the 2020 calendar year. Therefore, in some instances we have used the 2019 sales figures as an estimate. In other cases, data is available, but shows the significant disruption of multiple lockdowns on the production of aggregates.

Reducing the demands for minerals

Objective 1: reduce demand for minerals by:

• Increasing the supply of recycled, and, where practicable, secondary aggregates;
• Encouraging the sustainable use and recycling of minerals; and
• Encouraging the use of substitute materials in construction.

Relevant policies to objective 1 include:

• Policy MC4: Efficient Use of Mineral Resources;
• Policy MC5: Recycled and Secondary Aggregates;
• Policy AR1: Presumption in favour of sustainable development; and
• Policy AR5: High Value Recovery

The Surrey Minerals Plan sets a target to supply at least 0.8 million tonnes per annum of recycled and secondary aggregates by 2016 and at least 0.9 million tonnes per annum by 2026.

To help achieve these targets, Surrey County Council adopted the Aggregates Recycling Joint Development Plan Document (ARJDPD) in 2013. This allocates three sites for aggregates recycling and supports proposals on certain preferred areas for mineral extraction identified in the ARJDPD. The intensification or extension of existing aggregate recycling facilities and new facilities are also supported subject to compliance with policies in both the Surrey Minerals Plan and Surrey Waste Local Plan.

To encourage sustainable construction including the use of a proportion of recycling and secondary aggregates in construction projects, the Surrey Minerals Plan requires the district and borough councils in Surrey to include relevant policies in their Local Plans. Surrey County Council liaises with the district and boroughs to secure these policies.

Surrey County Council has published standing advice on sustainable construction (PDF) to assist the Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) in determining planning applications. When appropriate, more detailed comments are provided in responses to consultations on planning applications.

Figure 1: Sales of Recycled Aggregates (thousand tonnes) in Surrey 2008 to 2020

How did we do?

The results of the Aggregates Monitoring Survey 2020 show that sales of recycled and secondary aggregates produced in Surrey decreased by 37.5% to 0.6 million tonnes in 2020. This level of sales is below the Surrey Minerals Plan target of at least 0.9 million tonnes per annum by 2026. The decrease is down to disruption caused by the Coronavirus pandemic.

10 adopted local plans in Surrey include policies which seek to encourage the re-use and recycling of building materials in construction projects. These comprise of Elmbridge, Epsom & Ewell, Mole Valley, Reigate & Banstead, Runnymede, Spelthorne, Tandridge, Waverley and Woking. The Guildford Local Plan also includes a sustainable construction policy which was recently adopted in April 2019.

No new sites allocated in the ARJDPD received planning permission in 2020 to 2021.

Table 2: Key Performance Indicator, targets and scores related to Objective 1

Safeguarding the supply of minerals

Objective 2: safeguard the supply of minerals by:

• Conserving important mineral resources for use by future generations;
• Ensuring that important mineral resources and sites for mineral development are not sterilised by other development;
• Ensuring prior extraction of mineral resources, where possible, if land is to be sterilised by other development; and
• Conserving scarce and high quality mineral resources by ensuring that they are not used for purposes where lower grade, secondary or recycled materials could be used instead.

Relevant policies to objective 2 include:

• DC1: Safeguarding Sites;
• Policy MC6: Safeguarding Mineral Resources and Development; and
• Policy MC16: Rail Aggregate Depots.

Surrey County Council defines Mineral Safeguarding Areas (MSAs) to protect resources of concreting aggregates, soft sand, silica sand, brick clay and fuller's earth from being sterilised from other development. Existing and proposed mineral sites including rail aggregate depots and aggregate recycling facilities are also safeguarded.

The Surrey Minerals Plan requires the 11 district and boroughs in Surrey to consult the Minerals and Waste Planning Authority (MWPA) about applications for development which could sterilise mineral resources within MSAs or prejudice existing or proposed sites.

How did we do?

Surrey County Council's website provides an online map viewer which displays all the MSAs and existing minerals sites across the county.

In conjunction with the 11 district and boroughs, Surrey County Council has produced a revised consultation protocol which was published in October 2016 and is now in use.

In 2020/221, no planning permissions were granted for alternative development in areas safeguarded for mineral supply and where objection was raised by Surrey County Council.

Table 3: Key Performance Indicators, targets and scores related to Objective 2

Meet the need for minerals

Objective 3: meet the need for minerals by:

• Seeking to ensure that sufficient land is identified to enable the regional requirement for aggregates to be met and to provide appropriate landbanks for silica sand and clay;
• Establishing criteria that define the circumstances and locations where working of other non-aggregate minerals will be acceptable; and
• Seeking to ensure that sufficient land is identified for recycling facilities to meet the need for aggregates recycling.

Relevant policies to objective 3 include:

• Policy MC7: Aggregate Minerals Supply;
• Policy MC8: Silica Sand Supply;
• Policy MC9: Brick Clay Supply;
• Policy MC10: Other Non-Aggregate Minerals Supply;
• Policy MC11: Mineral Extraction Outside Preferred Areas;
• Policy MC12: Oil and Gas Development;
• Policy MC13: Underground Gas Storage;
• Policy MC16: Rail Aggregate Depots;
• Policy MA1: Aggregates Supply;
• Policy MA2: Preferred Areas for Concreting Aggregates;
• Policy MA3: Preferred Areas for Soft Sand;
• Policy AR2: Aggregate Recycling Facilities;
• Policy AR3: Aggregates Recycling at Mineral Sites; and
• Policy AR4: Aggregates Recycling Outside Preferred Areas.

Local Aggregate Assessment

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2021 requires the MWPA to prepare an annual Local Aggregate Assessment (LAA). An LAA is an assessment of future land-won sand and gravel supply and should be based on a rolling average of 10 years' sales data and other relevant local information. LAAs are required to include an assessment of all aggregate supply options.

Surrey's most recent Local Aggregate Assessment was published in July 2021.

The assessment of future mineral supply requirements concluded that the Surrey Minerals Plan provision rate is still appropriate.

Landbank for sand and gravel

The 2021 Aggregates Monitoring Survey calculated that the county's total landbank for primary aggregates fell slightly from 8.8 years at the end of 2019 to 8.7 years at the end of 2020. The primary reason for the decrease was due to no new significant planning permissions being granted during 2019 to replenish reserves that were extracted. The size of the landbank accords with the National Planning Policy Framework advice which requires a landbank of 7 years for sand and gravel.

In 2020/21, there were no new planning permission granted for primary extractions.

Landbank for silica sand

The landbank for silica sand is calculated as a range and is between 5 and 10 years which is below the target of more than 10 years contained in national policy advice. The actual landbank figure is not provided for reasons of commercial confidentiality.

No planning permissions for new sites for the extraction of silica sand were granted during 2020 to 2021.

Supply of brick clay

There are two brick clay production sites within the county, these are located in Mole Valley (Ewhurst Brickworks) and Beare Green (South Holmwood Brickworks).

No new planning permissions for brick clay extraction were determined in 2020 to 2021. However, the evidence base prepared in support of the preparation of the Surrey Minerals Plan indicated that permitted clay reserves at the individual sites were sufficient to satisfy the landbank requirement of 25 years required by the national policy guidance.

Other non-aggregate minerals supply

No planning applications were received or determined during 2020 to 2021 for other non-aggregate minerals.

Oil and gas development

No planning permissions were issued during 2020 to 2021 for oil and gas development.

Underground gas storage

No planning applications were received or determined during2020 to 2021 for underground gas storage.

How did we do?

The total landbank for primary aggregates (sand and gravel) was 8.7 years at the end of 2020. However, this figure masks a significant imbalance between the separate landbanks for concreting aggregates, and soft sand, which were 3.8 years and 14.9 years respectively.

Table 4: Key Performance Indicators, targets and scores related to Objective 3

Protecting communities and the environment

Objective 4: Address adverse impacts from mineral development on communities and the environment by:

• Identifying preferred areas for mineral development;
• Establishing planning policies that will ensure potential impacts on local communities and the environment are identified and suitably mitigate by applying the appropriate conditions to planning permissions;
• Protecting the integrity of internationally designated sites and features designated as having national importance; and
• Working with communities to ensure local issues are understood and addressed.

Relevant policies to objective 4 include:

• Policy MC1: Spatial Strategy – Location of Mineral Development in Surrey;
• Policy MC2: Spatial Strategy – Protection of Key Environmental Interests in Surrey;
• Policy MC3: Mineral Development in the Green Belt; and
• Policy MC14: Reducing the adverse impacts of mineral development.

The preferred areas and areas of search identified in the Surrey Minerals Plan identify locations where it is considered that mineral workings is possible without significant adverse impacts on the environment or the local community. There is a presumption against the working of sand and gravel and silica sand from land outside these areas to provide greater certainty for local communities and the minerals industry.

Policy MC2 states that mineral development will not be permitted where it would be likely to have an adverse impact on the integrity of sites covered by national and international designations.

Policy MC3 only allows mineral development in the Green Belt where the highest environmental standards of operation are maintained, and the land is restored to an agreed after-use consistent with Green Belt objectives within agreed time limits.

Policy MC14 only allows mineral development where there would be no significant adverse impact in relation to a number of matters including noise, dust, fumes, traffic, flood risk, landscape character, biodiversity, historic landscape, open space and the risk of birds striking aircraft.

How did we do?

In 2020 to 2021,16 full decisions were issued for minerals related development and 19 detail pursuant applications were determined. All decisions were related to existing permitted sites.

No new permissions were granted for primary aggregates extraction in 2020 to 2021

Table 5: Key Performance Indicators, targets and scores related to Objective 4

Addressing the adverse impacts of transportation

Objective 5: Address adverse impacts from the transportation of minerals by:

• Ensuring the potential impacts from transportation are considered when identifying areas for future mineral development;
• Establishing planning policies that will ensure that the impacts from transportation of minerals are assessed and suitable mitigation provided, where necessary;
• Securing measures to ensure that minerals can be transported safely;
• Encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation to road where possible; and
• Safeguarding existing rail depots and enabling new ones to be provided if need is demonstrated, to facilitate a long-term shift away from the bulk transportation of minerals by road.

Relevant policies to objective 5 include:

• Policy MC14: Reducing the Adverse Impacts of Minerals Development;
• Policy MC15: Transport for Minerals; and
• Policy MC16: Rail Aggregate Depots.

Surrey Minerals Plan policies MC14 and MC15 require the potential impacts of mineral transportation to be considered in the determination of planning applications and mitigation to be provided where necessary. Policy MC15 also ensures that mineral development involving transport by road will be permitted only where there is no practicable alternative to the use of road-based transport that would have a lower impact on communities and the environment.

The nature of the market for minerals in Surrey means that Heavy Good Vehicles (HGVs) are used for transportation in almost all cases as this is the most efficient means of transport. As aggregate minerals worked in Surrey tend to be used near to where they are extracted, there is limited scope to transport minerals by rail because this usually requires large volumes to be moved over longer distances to work in practical and commercial terms. Transportation by water is also problematic because of constraints associated with lock capacity, vessel size and wharf locations.

Opportunities to transport minerals to a mineral processing plant by conveyor are investigated where appropriate, as well as opportunities to transport minerals such as onshore oil and gas by pipeline.

The County Highway Authority (CHA) is consulted on all relevant applications for minerals development and their comments are taken into account in determining the same. Where necessary, the applicant is required to provide measures to address any significant adverse impacts. These are frequently addressed through the imposition of planning conditions limiting the number of HGV movements that are permitted and/or requiring other mitigation measures.

How did we do?

In 2020 to 2021, 16 full decisions were issued for minerals development and 19 details pursuant application were determined. All decisions were related to existing permitted sites. No permission relating to alternative methods of transport (other than by road) were issued.

Surrey has two rail aggregate depots at Woking (active) and Salfords (currently inactive), both of which are safeguarded by the Surrey Minerals Plan Core Strategy Development Plan Document. Between the two depots they present a good geographic spread between the west and east of the county. Rail connections enable the supply of crushed rock from the West Country and marine sand and gravel from Wharves of the Thames Estuary.

Table 6: Key Performance Indicators, targets and scores related to Objective 5

Restoration and enhancement

Objective 6: Restore mineral workings to the highest standards by:

• Promoting an holistic approach to mineral working, where progressive restoration is integrated into the management and phasing of the mineral extraction;
• Ensuring that mineral workings are restored in a timely way, consistent with green belt policy and objectives, and to a state that is consistent with - and enhance - local, social and environmental character, incorporating priority habitats and flood alleviation capacity, where appropriate, and;
• Ensuring that land used for mineral working is restored to an appropriate future use and managed so that it brings value to the environment and local community.

Relevant policies to objective 6 include:

• Policy MC17: Restoring Mineral Workings; and
• Policy MC18: Restoration and Enhancement.

The 'Surrey Style' of restoration is recognised as best practice by the Local Government Association and the Planning Officers Society and is advocated by the Nature after Minerals (NAM) initiative led by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and Natural England.

The Surrey Mineral Planning Site Restoration Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) promotes a restoration led approach to the consideration of applications for mineral working.

This approach enables site restoration and enhancements to deliver substantial environmental and community benefits including biodiversity, landscape, and recreational opportunities.

How did we do?

During the 2020 to 2021 monitoring period, progress on restoration schemes included:

• Progressive restoration continued with new sites or phases being signed into aftercare including the Old Hogs Back area of Runfold South and Albury Sandpit/Landfill site.
• Advancement of restoration works in other sites such as North Park Quarry, Stanwell Quarry, Hithermoor, Queen Mary's Quarry, further phases at Runfold South, as well as an enhancement project at Glebe Lake at Mercer's South Quarry.
• Promotion and support of a partnership approach such as through management groups overseeing the restoration and aftercare of Runfold South, Queen Mary's Quarry and Farnham Quarry, and input into Community Liaison Groups for North Park Quarry and Patteson Court.
• Monitoring of restored sites or phases in aftercare and under long term management to ensure their effective management and maintenance. These sites include: Park Lake, Coldharbour Lane, Runfold North and South, Reigate Road, Home Farm and Field Common North. Additional monitoring of operational sites to promote progressive restoration and the maintenance and aftercare of any advanced landscape planting.
• Involvement with Surrey Nature Partnership to ensure a joined-up approach between restoration strategies and other nature conservation strategies taking place across the county. Assisting with the organisation and successful running of the second Surrey Biodiversity and Planning Conference, despite the Coronavirus pandemic.
• Ongoing input into Surrey County Council's Tree Planting Strategy to ensure any sites suitable for additional tree planting are identified and included.
• Continued involvement with the joint Surrey County Council and Environment Agency River Thames flood alleviation scheme (RTS).
• Further contribution to the national steering group tasked with updating DEFRA's Good Practice Guide for Handling Soils.
• Ongoing involvement with the EU funded Urban Links to Landscape (UL2L) project and rolling out the implementation of a previous EU funded RESTORE project.
• Continued involvement in national steering group for Nature After Minerals (NAM).
• Continuing to raise concerns over the lack of inert waste materials available to restore mineral sites. This works against the policy prerogative of restoration at the earliest possible date and will lead to extension of time applications. Delays with the Environment Agency permitting process is further compounding the problem.

In 2020 to 2021, two planning applications were issued in relation to the restoration of mineral sites, these are summarised in Table 8.

Table 7 Key Performance Indicators, targets and scores related to Objective 6

Table 8 Summary of permissions issues in 2020 to 2021 related to restoration of mineral workings

Surrey Waste Local Plan

Highlights

• During 2020, Surrey produced an estimated total of 3.59 million tonnes of waste, including: 0.56 million tonnes of Local Authority Collected Waste, 0.55 million tonnes of Commercial and Industrial Waste, 2.45 million tonnes of Construction Demolition and Excavation (C,D&E) Waste, and 0.03 million tonnes of Hazardous Waste.
• During 2020, Surrey's Community Recycling Centres (CRCs) achieved a reuse and recycling rate of 51% and a landfill diversion rate of 88% (Waste Data Flow (WDF) 2020).
• Six planning consents were granted for waste related development in Surrey in 2020 to 2021.

Towards net self-sufficiency

Strategic objective 1: To make sure enough waste management capacity of the right type is provided to manage the equivalent amount of waste produced in Surrey.

Relevant policies include:

• Policy 1: Need for waste development

Surrey County Council is committed to achieving net self-sufficiency, which means the ability of Surrey County Council to provide sufficient capacity to manage the equivalent amount of waste produced within the county. This means that the amount of waste being produced and the capacity that is available in Surrey needs to be monitored to assess whether the policies in place are supporting this.

Current capacity

Surrey is technically net self-sufficient, however a large proportion of Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW) and Commercial and Industrial (C&I) waste is exported for treatment due to a lack of facilities within the county. The reliance on capacity outside of Surrey is of concern for the Waste Planning Authority (WPA) when considering Surrey County Council's requirement to be net self‑sufficient.

Information regarding a sites capacity is often provided alongside any planning application and supporting documents, however, this is likely to reflect a theoretical maximum capacity and, the actual throughput can be much lower.

The amount of waste being managed at each facility (its throughput), is dependent on a number of factors related to both the facility itself and external factors. These include:

• Technology in use at the site;
• Site layout;
• Number of permitted Heavy Good Vehicles (HGVs);
• Waste stream and available feedstock;
• Weather.

The best information about capacity can be obtained from direct contact with waste operators as changes to site layout, access, and improvements to equipment and infrastructure can all provide for an improvement to the throughput of a waste management facility. These changes may not always be directly attributable to the relevant waste management facility or require a new planning permission.

The annual throughput of waste management facilities is also estimated from the information collected by the Environment Agency (EA) through its Waste Data Interrogator (WDI). Information can also be obtained from planning permissions and related documents.

Current estimates for available capacity in Surrey, based on the Waste Needs Assessment (January 2019) undertaken to support the preparation of the Surrey Waste Local Plan, are set out in Table 9 to Table 12 below.

Table 9: Available waste management capacity in Surrey (tonnes per annum) for recycling and other recovery (excluding aggregate recycling and recovery to land)

Table 10: Available waste management capacity in Surrey (tonnes) for deposit of non-inert waste to land

Table 11: Available waste management capacity in Surrey (tonnes per annum) for C,D&E Recycling (source:World Nuclear Association (WNA) 2019)

Table 12: Available waste management capacity in Surrey (tonnes) for recovery of inert waste to land

New capacity

There was one planning permission granted in 2020 to 2021 that provided increased waste management capacity in relation to an existing facility, namely:

• Unit 11 and 12 Wintersells Road, Byfleet Road, Elmbridge (Planning Ref: EL18/3802)

How did we do?

Generally, there is sufficient capacity overall to deal with the equivalent amount of waste arising in Surrey, however, a significant proportion of this capacity is landfill. While landfill is recognised as an alternative the Minerals and Waste Planning Authority (MWPA) should plan for, it is considered the least desirable method of managing our waste. Therefore, Surrey needs to continue to promote facilities for preparing for reuse, recycling, and recovery of waste. Tables 13 to 16 shows that capacity gap in Surrey for 2017 to 2019.

Table 13: Waste management capacity gap in Surrey (tonnes per annum) for recycling and other recovery in 2017 to 2019 (excluding aggregate recycling and recovery to land)

Table 14: Waste management capacity gap in Surrey (tonnes) for deposit of non-inert waste to land in 2017 to 2019 (including landfill)

Table 15: Waste management capacity gap in Surrey (tonnes per annum) for C,D&E Recycling in 2017 to 2019 (including soil recycling)

Table 16: Waste management capacity gap in Surrey (tonnes) for recovery of inert waste to land in 2017 to 2019 (including landfill)

Table 17: Key Performance Indicators, targets and scores related to net self-sufficiency

Sustainable management of waste

Strategic Objective 2: To encourage development which supports sustainable waste management at least in line with national targets for recycling, recovery and composting.

Strategic Objective 3: To manage waste by disposal to land as an option of last resort.

Relevant policies include:

• Policy 2: Recycling and recovery
• Policy 3: Recycling of inert C,D&E waste
• Policy 4: Sustainable construction and waste management in new development
• Policy 5: Recovery of inert waste to land
• Policy 6: Disposal of non-inert waste to land
• Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (JMWMS)
• Waste Disposal Authority Action Plan

The Waste Framework Directive (WFD) is the overarching European legislation with regards to waste. The WFD includes the requirement for plans to promote sustainable management of waste through the waste hierarchy. The waste hierarchy promotes the prevention of waste and, where this is not possible, recommends waste materials should be reused, recycled or recovered. Landfill and incineration without energy recovery are the least preferred options for waste management and sit at the bottom of the hierarchy. The WFD has been transcribed into UK law via the Waste Regulations 2011 (as amended).

The European Union agreed the Circular Economy Package (CEP) on 22 May 2018, which sets out amendments to the WFD as well as the Landfill Directive and the Packaging Waste Directive. Key features of the package include requirements for member states to achieve:

• Municipal waste recycling rates of 55% by 2025, 60% by 2030 and 65% by 2035.
• Packaging materials recycling rates of 65% by 2025 and 70% by 2030.
• A maximum of 35% municipal waste to landfill by 2035.
• Separate collection of textiles and hazardous waste from households by 2025.

The UK government has said that it will adopt the CEP measures, which were formally adopted by the EU in May 2018.

The UK government released a Resource and Waste Strategy in December 2018, which sets out how the UK will preserve our stock of material resources by minimising waste, promoting resource efficiency and moving towards a circular economy. The strategy set out five strategic ambitions:

1. To work towards all plastic packaging placed on the market being recyclable, reusable or compostable by 2025;
2. To work towards eliminating food waste to landfill by 2030;
3. To eliminate avoidable plastic waste over the lifetime of the 25 Year Environment Plan;
4. To double resource productivity by 2050; and
5. To eliminate avoidable waste of all kinds by 2050.

The Surrey Waste Partnership, made up of the 11 district and borough councils as the Waste Collection Authorities (WCAs), and Surrey County Council as the Waste Disposal Authority (WDA), maintain the Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (JMWMS). The JMWMS sets out how the Surrey Waste Partnership will manage Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW) in the most efficient, effective, economical and sustainable manner.

A revised Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (Revision 2) was formally adopted by all Surrey authorities in November 2015. The revised strategy sets out a number of strategic targets; total household waste per person, recycling and recovery rate, percentage municipal waste sent to landfill, and cost of waste management per household. The JMWMS also outlines a number of actions to be undertaken to deliver the Surrey Waste Partnership's objectives. The JMWMS is focused on achieving sustainable management of LACW through positive partnership working.

Surrey Waste Partnership reviews the suitability of the joint strategy's actions each year and made minor updates in 2016, 2017 and 2018. The partnership reviews the strategic targets of the strategy every two years, and the latest review in spring 2017 found that the existing targets were still fit for purpose. Aside from the annual action updates, the strategies are now due to be reviewed again. Progress against the actions of the joint strategy is reviewed annually at partnership meetings, and progress against the targets is reviewed every quarter.

Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW)

LACW data is calculated from data reported by local authorities to WasteDataFlow (WDF), a UK web-based system for LACW data reporting by local authorities to Government.

Table 17 shows the LACW arisings in Surrey in 2020/21 were 556,458 tonnes, slightly more than the 526,642 tonnes in 2019/20. The total amount of LACW reused, recycled or composted was 300,348 tonnes. Of the remaining 256,110 tonnes of residual waste, 235,076 tonnes were sent for energy recovery and 21,034 tonnes were sent to landfill.

Table 17: Management of Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste in Surrey for 2020 (WasteDataFlow 2020)

The revised JMWMS (2015) recognises that traditional targets for recycling and amount of household waste arisings are not flexible and do not take account of external factors such as the state of the economy and extreme weather.

A combined recycling recovery rate target is aimed at increasing flexibility in reporting for instances where recovery is preferable to recycling, for example recovering energy from wood waste that is not clean enough for recycling. The methodology for calculating the recycling recovery rate includes the tonnage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling, or composting, and separately collected materials where recovery is preferable to recycling such as street sweepings and non-clean wood.

The revised JMWMS (2015) sets revised targets to be achieved by 2019 to 2020 for the management of municipal waste using 2013 to 2014 as a baseline. These targets include:

• Total household waste and recycling per person – target performing in the top quartile of WDAs;
• Recycling and recovery rate [footnote 11] - target 70%;
• Municipal waste sent to landfill - target 0%.

In 2020/21 the Community Recycling Centres (CRCs) in Surrey received 72,597 tonnes of waste, 51% of which was reused or recycled, 37% of which was sent for energy recovery and 12% of which was sent to landfill. A breakdown of the quantities of materials received is given in Appendix 3.

The total percentage of household waste sent for re-use, recycling or composting in each district in 2020 to 2021 is given in Table 18. The recycling rates are calculated from data reported by local authorities to WasteDataFlow.

Table 18: Reuse, recycling and composting rates (%) for household waste for district and boroughs in Surrey 2020 (Waste data flow 2020)

The recycling rates for LACW in the Surrey districts and boroughs continues to be high. Furthermore, there is evidence to support a decrease in residual waste arisings per household which increased from 448 kg per head in 2019 to 482 kg per head in 2020 (WDF 2020). However, there is an ongoing need to continue to focus on reducing LACW in line with waste prevention which sits at the top of the waste hierarchy.

Figure 2: Local Authority Collected Waste arising and fate (percentage) between 2007 to 2020 (WasteDataFlow)

The amount of waste being sent for recovery was 177,702 tonnes in 2020/21. The recovered material was mainly sent to Energy from Waste (EfW) facilities and facilities for processing of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) outside of the county at:

• Allington Quarry, Laverstoke Road, Maidstone, Kent (32%)
• Lakeside Energy from Waste Facility, Lakeside Road, Colnbrook, Berkshire (3%)
• Stobart Biomass Tilbury (8%)
• Facility outside the UK but within Europe (57%)

Commercial and industrial (C&I) waste

There is currently no formal requirement for all businesses to report material flows or waste arisings. Existing data sources that incorporate elements of this information, such as waste transfer notes, and waste permit returns, allow for an insufficient depth of analysis to estimate C&I waste arisings.

The most current survey data for Commercial and Industrial (C&I) waste arisings in Surrey is based on data from a national survey published in December 2010 [footnote 12]. The report was commissioned by Defra and produced by Jacobs, with support from Halcrow. The survey reported that 6,250,000 tonnes of C&I waste was generated in the South-East region. It was estimated that total C&I arisings in Surrey were 548,000 tonnes.

An updated calculation for C&I waste was undertaken using a modified version of the national methodology for Commercial & Industrial Waste (2014) [footnote 13] to support the preparation of a new Surrey Waste Local Plan. The amount of C&I waste arising in Surrey was calculated using the following equation:

C&I waste = (Inputs to permitted facilities + inputs to energy from waste + exemptions + exports) - (household waste + C,D&E waste + mining, agricultural and wastewater waste + imports)

The result of this work was a revised estimate that 547,975 tonnes of C&I waste was generated in Surrey in 2020.

In order to be able to report on changes in C&I year on year, the EA's WDI has been used as a source for C&I waste information before 2015.

The WDI provides an indication of the volume of waste managed through permitted facilities. It does not include those facilities which process waste under exemptions.

Figure 3: Estimated C&I waste arising (tonnes per annum) in Surrey for the period 2009 to 2020 (WDI 2020)

Construction, demolition and excavation (C,D&E) Waste

Construction waste is defined as "waste materials, which arise from the construction or demolition of buildings and/or civil engineering infrastructure, including hard construction and demolition waste and excavation waste, whether segregated or mixed" [footnote 14].

The methodology applied to calculate CD&E waste was modified from the Defra Methodology for Calculating CD&E waste for Waste Statistics and Waste Framework Directive reporting purposes [footnote 15]. The amount of CD&E waste arising in Surrey was calculated using the following equation:

CD&E waste = Inputs to permitted facilities + outputs from permitted facilities + recycled aggregates + exemptions

The result was that an estimated 2,449,073 tonnes of CD&E waste arose in Surrey in 2020.

The EA's WDI provides a summary of types and quantities of waste that were handled by waste facilities regulated by the EA. These returns are only for those facilities which are regulated under a permitting regime and so are not the complete picture. However, they are useful in identifying general trends in CD&E waste arisings.

Figure 4: Amount of CD&E waste (tonnes per annum) in Surrey for the period 2009- 2020 (WDI 2020)

Other waste streams

Based on information in the Environment Agency's Hazardous Waste Interrogator, the amount of hazardous waste arisings in Surrey during 2020 was 33,602 tonnes.

Figure 5: Amount of hazardous waste arising (tonnes per annum) in Surrey for the period 2009 to 2020 (Hazardous Waste Data Interrogator (HWDI) 2020)

How did we do?

A summary of the waste arisings for each of the main waste streams (LACW, C&I and CD&E) are shown in Table 19 below. All three waste arisings fell slightly from 2019 to 2020.

Surrey County Council is moving towards its target for sending zero LACW to landfill; in 2020 to 2021 the amount of LACW waste to landfill was 4% (WDF 2020). Similarly, the council is progressing well towards achieving its target for recycling at CRCs with 54% of LACW waste being reused, recycled or composted (WDF 2020).

Table 19: Summary of Waste Arisings for main waste streams in Surrey for 2019 and 2020 [footnote 16]

Table 20: Key Performance Indicator, targets and scores related to Sustainable Management of Waste

Location of waste facilities

Strategic Objective 4: To retain and make best use of existing sites for waste development.

Strategic Objective 5: To direct new facilities to locations that are most suitable for waste development.

Relevant policies include:

• Policy 7: Safeguarding.
• Policy 8: Improvement or extension of existing facilities.
• Policy 9: Green Belt.
• Policy 10: Areas suitable for the development of waste management facilities.
• Policies 11a and 11b: Strategic waste site allocations and Allocations of a Site for a Household Waste Materials Recycling Facility.
• Policy 12: Waste Water Treatment Works.

No sites allocated in the Surrey Waste Local Plan (SWLP) 2020 received planning permission for a new waste use in 2020 to 2021. In addition to this, no sites allocated in the SWLP 2020 received planning permissions relating to existing waste uses in 2020 to 2021

Of the 10 full planning permissions for waste management development granted in 2020 to 2021, eight were located on land designated as Metropolitan Green Belt.

No sites allocated in the SWLP for waste management development were lost to alternative uses following an objection from the county council on grounds of safeguarding in 2020 to 2021

How did we do?

Policy 10 provides key principles of areas suitable for development of waste management facilities. The policy sets out that it is preferred for development of additional waste management capacity on suitable sites outside the Green Belt.

All applications for sites within the Green Belt were assessed against the relevant policies in the SWLP and it was determined that reasonable exceptions to Green Belt policy could be made so as to allow for the grant of planning permission in those particular circumstances.

Table 21: Key Performance Indicators, targets and score related towards net self-sufficiency

Protecting communities and the environment

Strategic Objective 6: To encourage innovation and best practice which provide opportunities to minimise the impact of waste development on communities and the environment.

Strategic Objective 7: To keep waste movement by road to minimum practicable levels and support options for sustainable transport.

Strategic Objective 8: To work closely with our partners.

Relevant policies include:

• Policy 13: Sustainable design.
• Policy 14: Protecting communities and environments.
• Policy 15: Transport and connectivity.
• Policy 16: Community engagement.

Policy 14 seeks to ensure that any new permission granted for waste management facilities would not result in significant adverse effects on people, land, infrastructure and resources. In 2020 to 2021, no consents for waste management development were granted in an area covered by a landscape designation.

No new limits were imposed on highways movements, but it is noted that all decisions were related to sites in existing waste use, some of which have existing limits on movements of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs).

By assessing these applications against the policies Surrey County Council continues to demonstrate its commitment to protecting its communities and environment. By ensuring appropriate conditions are included, Surrey County Council seeks to negotiate the best possible outcomes from development where this impacts in areas designated for their special environmental, landscape or historical features.

How did we do?

Surrey County Council achieved its target of no new permissions for waste management development in areas covered by international and national designations [footnote 17]. There was one details pursuant permission granted for an existing site in the Surrey Hills AONB and Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV). There were also three permissions granted with close proximity to a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI), however appropriate conditions should mitigate against any unacceptable impacts.

Table 22: Key Performance Indicators, targets and scored related to Protecting communities and the environment

Footnotes

[Footnote 8] For the purpose of the waste needs assessment this includes composting and transfer facilities.

[Footnote 9] Based on all major waste streams sent for disposal.

[Footnote 10] Based on C, D & E waste arisings sent for recovery to land.

[Footnote 11] Based on National Indicator 192 calculation methodology, plus recovered street sweepings and recovered wood waste.

[Footnote 12] Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (2010) 'Survey of Commercial and Industrial Waste Arisings 2010', December 2010.

[Footnote 13] Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (2014) 'New Methodology to Estimate Waste Generation by the Commercial & Industrial Sector in England', August 2014.

[Footnote 14] Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG): Survey of Arisings and Use of Construction and Demolition Waste as Aggregate in England: 2005.

[Footnote 15] Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (2012) 'Methodology for estimating annual waste generation from the Construction, Demolition & Excavation (CD&E) Sectors in England'

[Footnote 16] C&I and CD&E waste are estimates only.

[Footnote 17] Includes Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Areas (SPA), RAMSAR sites, Areas of Outstanding natural Beauty (AONB), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Scheduled Monuments and Registered Parks and Gardens.

Monitoring and enforcement

Highlights

• During 2020 to 2021 the Monitoring and Enforcement Team made a total of 68 scheduled visits to minerals or waste management sites. Unfortunately, due to the Coronavirus pandemic, the number of visits was greatly reduced from previous years but will increase again for 2020 to 2021.
• The team made 19 visits in response to complaints about unauthorised development as well as other non-scheduled visits to previously identified sites involving unauthorised waste management development.
• Complex planning audits continue and are being maintained for all permitted mineral waste management development, enabling the MWPA to regulate planning conditions and development.
• The team continues to address challenging issues when investigating or taking enforcement action against breaches of planning control.
• Examples of successful enforcement action and ongoing challenges are provided below.

Figure 6: Unauthorised development where mixed waste was imported, deposited, stored and burnt, with inert waste comprising soils and hardcore being spread of the land.

Figure 7: Unauthorised disposal of inert waste on land without owner's knowledge

Monitoring

As a result of internal re-organisation within the department, Development Management Officers (planners dealing with applications), took over the dedicated monitoring (on a trial basis) of authorised of minerals and waste management sites which benefitted from planning permission. Enforcement Officers continued to deal wholly with the investigation and enforcement relating to unauthorised development.

Strategic Objectives:

• To strengthen the Planning Officers' understanding of the operational side of the mineral and waste industry which assists in dealing with applications.
• Improve their understanding of unauthorised minerals and waste management development and address as required.
• To monitor and ensure compliance with conditions attached to planning permissions.
• To take enforcement action, if expedient, where breaches of planning control have occurred.
• Checking the performance of the operating companies.
• Observing site development and operations to maintain planning control.
• Assessing the effectiveness of planning conditions.
• Maintaining records of development progress.

The monitoring of authorised sites serves several purposes, including:

• Checking the performance of the operating companies.
• Observing site development and operations to maintain planning control.
• Assessing the effectiveness of planning conditions.
• Maintaining records of development progress.

Site visits

Site visits are also undertaken to investigate and monitor unauthorised development, which may result in enforcement action being taken.

During 2020 to 2021, a total of 68 scheduled site visits were made. The number of complaints/enquiries refer to both permitted and unauthorised sites [footnote 18].

Table 23: Number of site visits and complaints investigated by Surrey County Council Planning Enforcement Officers

Of the 69 complaints received in 2020/21: 24 were referred to other appropriate regulatory authorities (the relevant borough/district councils, EA or the Police) and the remaining 45 complaints dealt with by County Enforcement Officers involved liaison with both Local Planning Authorities (district and borough councils) and the EA.

The EA was made aware of all sites pre- or post- investigation. A total of 26 site visits were conducted, mostly to sites involving unauthorised waste management development. The remaining complaints were either resolved through dialogue with site operators or became the subject of ongoing investigation and negotiation.

The MWPA is empowered by regulation [footnote 19] to charge for site visits whilst monitoring and enforcing the conditions governing mineral permissions. This additional financial resource has enabled Officers to complete complex planning audits on all mineral sites. Nearly all authorised waste sites also underwent a similar planning audit, which has improved the MWPA's ability to regulate sites with planning permission.

The Enforcement and Monitoring Team continues to investigate complaints, relating almost exclusively to waste activity, including unauthorised land-raising through the deposit of waste soils and disposal of non-inert waste through burning.

Figure 8: Shows unauthorised Landraising

Figure 8 shows unauthorised land raising of a field which is within eight metres of a watercourse and impeding the flood plain, which resulted in the works being stopped and has led to a retrospective planning application being submitted and withdrawn. A different planning application to retain most of the raised area, but to remove and relocate the soils that are too close to the watercourse to elsewhere on the property, is due to be submitted in 2021.

In 2020/21 the Monitoring and Enforcement Team continued to deal with complex and challenging issues when investigating or taking enforcement action against breaches of planning control:

• Epsom Chalk Pit, College Road, Epsom – A planning application to redevelop a site which benefits from a lawful use for waste separation and transfer into a waste recovery facility involving mechanical processing was complicated by the operator commencing development, creating noise and dust impacts, prior to its determination. In addition, in February, a fire started on site (when the site was closed), which resulted in the fire brigade attending and neighbour concerns were exacerbated as a result of noxious smoke from the fire. These activities resulted in County Planning Officers, Environmental Health Officers from Epsom and Ewell Borough Council and the EA working together, and it was the EA that led discussions with the operator to address the above issues and the requirements of the EA permit under which the site operates. The relevant application (Ref. EP21/00223/CMA) was reported to Surrey County Council's Planning and Regulatory Committee on 23 February 2022 who resolved to grant planning permission for the development proposed. However, before issuing the relevant decision notice the MWPA is consulting with the Secretary of State.
• Stanwell Quarry, southern perimeter Road, Heathrow – Unauthorised development comprising a zap shelter and portacabins was raised with the operator and a retrospective planning application was submitted and is being dealt with.

Examples of successful enforcement action and ongoing challenges include:

• Oak Tree Farm (Also know as (AKA) Evergreen Farm), Partridge Lane, Newdigate – After joint investigation and site visits, an Enforcement Notice was issued that addressed mixed use planning breaches, comprising both district and county planning matters. The MWPA supported the Mole Valley District Council's enforcement action at the online appeal in June 2021 and a decision was issued in July 2021. The appeal was partially successful in terms of the retention of some buildings, but the waste management development has to cease and be removed from the land.
• Brick Kiln Copse, Old Lane, Ockham – An Enforcement Notice was issued in September 2020 to address an unauthorised aggregate recycling facility that had gained the benefit of an Environmental permit from the EA. An appeal has been made against the notice and will be determined by the Planning Inspectorate in 2022.
• Wrays Farm (AKA Ridgeways Farm), Lonesome Lane, Reigate – A second bite Enforcement Notice was not issued as anticipated as a result of Data Protection issues which proved difficult to overcome and progress was further complicated by the effects of the Coronavirus pandemic.
• Dean Oak Farm, Leigh – Following the unauthorised raising of land that also impedes the flood plain, a satisfactory retrospective planning application to address the development has yet to be submitted. Dialogue continues and an application is now anticipated in 2022.
• Hathersham Lane, Smallfield – Discussion has been ongoing, but a satisfactory retrospective planning application to address an unauthorised soil and aggregate recycling operation with an additional scrap metal use, has still to be submitted. Dialogue continues, and it is anticipated that an application that can be validated will be submitted and processed in 2021.
• Birchen Wood Farm, West Park Road, Newchapel – Unauthorised landraising took place on land that had the benefit of planning permission from Tandridge District Council for a soil bund on a track, this resulted in the issuance of a Planning Contravention Notice to the landowner who was living in Spain, and an Enforcement Notice requiring the removal of the imported waste soils will be issued in 2022.
• Acre Farm, Hare Lane, Blindley Heath – A Temporary Stop Notice was issued in March 2021 to address both the unauthorised importation, deposit and storage of mixed inert waste soils and hardcore on the land. The landowner, who appears to be a victim of crime, is in discussion with the MWPA as to the future clearance of the waste from the land.
• Hedgehog Field, Dowlands Lane, Copthorne - Following the unauthorised landraising and construction of a soil bund around the site, and the disposal of a small volume of asbestos and green waste, an Enforcement Notice was issued in March 2021. The notice requires the removal of all imported waste soils, asbestos and green waste, and to return the field to its previous condition.
• Honeycrock Farm, Green Lane, Salfords – Action against the unauthorised use of an area of the site for mixed waste import with disposal by burning, and the import of landscaping waste for both disposal by burning and storage, was commenced through the issue of Planning Contravention Notices in March 2021.
• Land south of Newchapel Road, Lingfield - A Temporary Stop Notice was issued in March 2021 to address both the unauthorised importation, deposit, storage and disposal by burning of both mixed waste and the unauthorised import and spreading of inert waste soils and hardcore on the land. Importation ceased and clearance of the site commenced shortly after service.
• Randalls Nursery, Lyne – An unauthorised skip yard had been set up, and was found to be undertaking the separation of waste and the disposal by burning of mixed waste. A Planning Contravention Notice was issued and the landowners have removed the tenant, the activity has ceased and waste is to be removed from the site.

Many other sites of a similar nature are dealt with through negotiations each year, without the need to take formal enforcement action, to cease unauthorised waste management development: whether it be non-inert or inert, disposal, recycling through a range of processes or simply storage of waste.

Footnotes

[Footnote 20] Surrey County Council Planning Enforcement Officers' site visit and complaint logs.

[Footnote 21] The Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2006.

Decision making

Highlights

• In 2020/21 the Planning service received 52 valid minerals and waste management planning applications and 53 county development (Reg. 3) planning applications.
• During 2020/21 46 decisions for minerals and waste management development and 48 for county development were issued.

Validating applications

In accordance with national guidance, the Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities (MWPAs) Validation Checklist helps applicants to provide information that enables Surrey County Council to register, assess and determine planning applications in a timely way.

The MWPA is reviewing the checklist to ensure that it remains fit for purpose.

Minerals and waste valid applications

During 2020 to 2021, 52 valid planning applications were received, and 19 further planning applications were received for non‑material amendments to existing planning permissions [footnote 20]. The number of valid applications received annually between 2009/10 and 2020/21 is illustrated in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Number of valid planning applications for minerals and waste development received by Surrey County Council between 2009 to 2010 to 2020 to 2021.

Minerals and waste decisions

A total of 46 decisions were issued during 2020 to 2021. Appendix 1 provides details of these decisions.

19 further decisions were issued for non‑material amendments to existing planning permissions.

Figure 10: Number of decisions issued on Minerals and Waste applications received between 2009 to 2010 to 2020 to 2021

Of the 46 decisions made relating to minerals and waste management development in 2020 to 2021, six were made by committee and 40 were made under delegated powers.

County development (Regulation 3) valid applications

During 2020 to 2021, Surrey County Council received 53 valid planning applications. 3 further valid planning applications for non‑material amendments to existing planning permissions were also received. There was a significant decrease in the number of planning applications received by SCC between the monitoring periods 2019 to 2020 to 2020 to 2021. It is likely that this is due to the effects of the Coronavirus pandemic.

Figure 11: Number of valid planning applications for the county council development received by Surrey County Council between 2009 to 2010 to 2020 to 2021.

County development (Regulation 3) decisions issued

A total of 48 decisions were issued during 2020/21.

Five further decisions were issued for non‑material amendments to existing planning permissions.

Figure 12: Number of decisions issued on County Development Applications received by Surrey County Council between 2009 to 2010 to 2020 to 2021.

During 2020 to 2021, three decisions on county development applications were made by committee.

Footnotes

[Footnote 22] An application is only registered as a valid application if it is accompanied by the correct fee, plans and certificates and is adequately described and detailed. The term 'applications' includes applications for planning permission and submissions for approval of details pursuant to conditions (Article 21 submissions), Minerals Review and Interim Development Order (IDO) submissions.

Appendix 1: Minerals and waste planning decisions issued 2020 to 2021

Elmbridge

Epsom and Ewell

Mole Valley

Reigate and Banstead

Runnymede

Spelthorne

Tandridge

Waverley

Woking

Appendix 2: Minerals and waste sites in Surrey

Elmbridge

Epsom and Ewell

Guildford

Mole Valley

Reigate and Banstead

Runnymede

Spelthorne

Surrey Heath

Tandridge

Waverley

Woking

Appendix 3: Materials recovered at Community Recycling Centres

Quantities of waste materials recovered at Community Recycling Centres in 2021

Reprocessor information for waste materials recovered at CRCs in 2021 (WasteDataFlow 2020)