The Environment Scrutiny Commission was scheduled to meet on Wednesday 30 April 2025 to discuss topics ranging from Thames Water's street works to Transport for London's (TfL) contributions to environmental health. The commission was also expected to review responses to the draft Climate and Environment and Householder Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs). Additionally, a review of internal highways project management was scheduled.

Thames Water and Network Management

James Abbott, Local Engagement Manager, Public Affairs, Thames Water, alongside Ian Law, Traffic Manager, and Paul Lowbridge, Roads and Street Works Manager, were expected to attend the meeting. The focus of this agenda item was to explore ways to improve the reinstatement of streets to their original condition after Thames Water sub-contractors complete their work.

Transport for London (TfL)

TfL was invited to contribute to the scrutiny review on Environmental Health. This contribution was expected to cover infrastructure updates aimed at increasing active travel¹, partnership work to deliver Streets for People², and improvements to cycling safety, particularly in identified safety hotspots.

Climate and Environment & Householder Draft SPD Commission Response

The Environment Scrutiny Commission was scheduled to note the completed response to the draft Climate and Environment SPD and draft Householder SPD.

The commission's response highlighted several areas for attention, drawing on past reviews and recommendations. These included:

• Energy Review: The commission suggested that projects targeting Passivhaus³ certification should be 'deemed to comply' with Southwark's SPD requirements. They also called for more detailed consideration of using timber and other low embodied carbon materials. The commission felt that the SPD did not take due account of recommendations regarding district heating networks and continued to presuppose that large developments would simply be connected to SELCHP⁴.

  The Commission feels that the SPD does not take due account of these recommendations and continues to presuppose that large developments will simply be connected SELCHP. The Energy Review, which took evidence from Passive House Trust and Developers, concluded that large new developments ought to be sufficiently energy efficient not to require additional energy from a DHN and, if additional energy were required, that localised micro networks are preferable and sufficient.

  The commission expressed concern that energy supplied by District Heating Networks (DHNs) often originates from SELCHP, which they argued is not genuinely a low carbon source.

• Biodiversity Review: The commission recommended prioritising the development of a Green Infrastructure Strategy to map out a coherent Ecological Network for Southwark. They also suggested exploring methods of delivering biodiversity improvements through the planning process beyond the minimum 10% Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) specified in the Environment Act 2021⁵, combined with more ambitious Urban Greening Factor (UGF)⁶ targets. The commission also stated that all BNG must be delivered on site.

• Householder SPD: The commission expressed disappointment at the lack of mention of air-conditioning in the Householder SPD, arguing that the SPD fails to provide much needed guidance on this important area. They also drew attention to the need for a fabric first approach to reducing all energy consumption and encouraged householders to improve insulation.

  It is essential for the SPD to highlight the need for a “fabric first” approach to reducing all energy consumption and encourage householders to improve insulation in order to reduce the impact of extreme temperatures – both hot and cold – thus reducing the need for air conditioning.

  The commission also endorsed the recommendations that Southwark Nature Action Volunteers have submitted by way of response to the consultation on the two SPDs.

Highways Internal Project Management Review

Officers were scheduled to outline the purpose and scope of the Highways Internal Project Management Review.