River Mease, the Impact on Development
The copyright on this image of the River Mease is owned by Michael Patterson and is licensed for reuse under the Creative Commons Attribution‐ShareAlike 2.0 license.
An Environment Scrutiny Committee Report on the Impact on Development of the River Mease September 2010 Report, together with written evidence River Mease Working Party
The River Mease Working Party
Cllr Jones Cllr Saffell Cllr Wyatt Chairman
The council’s scrutiny committees examine, in detail, selected areas of the council’s work, responsibilities and policies. The aim is to find out if there are ways in which the council could be doing things better and to influence national issues. This report is the result of an examination of a particular subject. It sums up how the scrutiny committee carried out the examination, its findings and considerations, conclusions and recommendations for any improvements.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 2 River Mease, the Impact on Development
Contents SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 5 BACKGROUND ...... 7
AREAS OF WORK...... 7 EVIDENCE GATHERING...... 7
WRITTEN EVIDENCE...... 7
ORAL EVIDENCE ...... 8 ISSUES CONSIDERED ...... 8
THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE AGENCIES ...... 8 The Council...... 8 Natural England...... 8 Environment Agency...... 8 ‘Taking Ownership’ ...... 9
THE CURRENT POSITION ...... 9 Designation and the LDF...... 9 Phosphates...... 10
POSSIBLE ACTION TO ALLEVIATE THE ISSUES ...... 10
THE LIKELY IMPACT ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA ...... 11
STEPS TO IMPROVE THE SITUATION ...... 11
LONGER‐TERM APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA ...... 12
CONCLUSIONS ...... 12 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 12 APPENDICES ‐ EVIDENCE ...... 14
WITNESSES ...... 14
LIST OF WRITTEN EVIDENCE ...... 14 Natural England...... 15 Environment Agency...... 19 Severn Trent Water Ltd...... 23 Ashby de la Zouch Civic Society...... 25 Ashby de la Zouch Town Council...... 43
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire
River Mease, the Impact on Development
Summary, conclusions and recommendations During work in conjunction with the preparation of the Local Development Framework, the Environment Agency raised objections to allocation for housing of land within the River Mease Special Area of Conservation. This area is an environment protected at the highest European level and pollution levels in the River Mease are above the target for this designation. This has serious implications for the identification of land for housing development of the Local Development Framework and the Portfolio Holder for Place Shaping requested that the Environment Scrutiny Committee investigate the issues and explore possible solutions to the issues. The Environment Scrutiny Committee appointed Councillors G Jones, A Saffell and M Wyatt to the River Mease Working Party. The working party had benefit of written evidence and oral evidence from the agencies involved, local developers, parish councils and members of the public. We would also like to thank all those who have helped us with our work, particularly those who attended our meetings. Despite the different aspects of involvement of the different agencies to which we spoke, there was considerable willingness to contribute towards a solution. The River Mease Working Party makes recommendations that; The issues are complex. There is no short‐term solution and in the longer‐term, it is likely that investment will be needed for the water treatment works. The meetings between agencies are useful in ensuring that they are working together. R1. Officers continue to liaise with all agencies in seeking to move towards a long‐term solution. Although frequent reports would not be necessary, we feel that further progress should be reported to members and the most appropriate medium would be the Environment Scrutiny Committee. R2. Further reports on developments and progress be made to the Environment Scrutiny Committee. We feel that we have completed the remit given to us and that the working party completes its work in presenting this report containing our recommendations. R3. The Environment Scrutiny Committee disband the River Mease Working Party.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 5
River Mease, the Impact on Development
c. Establish the likely impact Background on future development in 1. Work in preparation of the Local the area. Development Framework (LDF), d. Make recommendations revealed that there were serious for steps to improve the issues relating to how much situation and appropriate development might be appropriate longer‐term approach to in Ashby and Measham because of development in the area. the possible impact on the River e. Report by the meeting of Mease Special Area of the Environment Scrutiny Conservation (SAC). Committee scheduled for 2. Discussions took place with both 18 May 20101. the Environment Agency and Natural England to explore this Evidence Gathering issue. It is apparent from the
discussions that the potential 6. At our first meeting, the working impact of this issue was potentially party received an introductory more serious than initially report that set the scene for the envisaged. examination.
3. The Portfolio Holder for Place 7. We also received written Shaping asked whether the submissions from partner agencies Scrutiny Committee would and other bodies. investigate the situation, possible 8. All comments were constructive, action to alleviate the issues and explaining the issues and looking the likely impact on future for resolution. development in the area. 9. We would like to thank all those 4. In response to this request, the who gave us evidence in person or Environment Scrutiny Committee in writing. appointed Councillors, G Jones, A Saffell and M Wyatt to a River Written Evidence Mease Working Party. 10. In advance of our meetings we Areas of Work invited written evidence from the following parties; 5. The Working Party has consulted a. Natural England with partners and others in order to; b. Environment Agency a. Investigate the current c. Severn Trent Water Ltd. situation, b. Explore possible action to
alleviate the issues. 1 Due to changes in the Council’s calendar of meetings and the working party’s wish to monitor progress, this report will be made to a meeting on 8 December 2010.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 7 River Mease Working Party
d. Town and Parish Councils applications with implications for in the area the environment. e. Ward members 16. Of particular interest to this f. Members of the public examination, Natural England advises on impact upon designated Oral Evidence sites of Special Scientific Interest and Special Areas for 11. Before our meetings, we received Conservation. considerable interest in our 17. Ian Butterfield stressed to us that proceedings. it is not the role of Natural England 12. At our meetings, we received to design solutions for specific presentations and statements problems but it does offer from witnesses as well as constructive advice upon observations and contributions suggested designs3. from others in attendance. Environment Agency Issues Considered 18. The Environment Agency’s aim is ‘to contribute to achieving The Roles and sustainable development – Responsibilities of the prosperity along with a healthy, rich and diverse environment for Agencies present and future generations’4. The Council 19. The Agency’s prime role in the planning process is to advise on 13. The Council is the Local Planning those aspects of development Authority (LPA) responsible for plans and planning applications preparation of the LDF including which relate to its area of meeting regionally allocated expertise having regard to the housing needs and for decisions on Habitat Regulations as a planning applications. ‘Competent Authority’ under those Natural England regulations. 20. The Agency issues and regulates 14. Natural England is responsible is Consents to Discharge and a responsible for ensuring that the statutory duty to review the natural environment is ‘conserved, consents under the Habitat enhanced and managed for the Regulations. benefit of present and future generations’2. 15. Natural England is a statutory consultee on all planning
3 Source; Natural England written submission Page 15 and Mr Butterfield, Natural England, evidence 2 Source; Natural England written submission 4 Source; Environment Agency written Page 15 submission Page 19
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 8 River Mease, the Impact on Development
‘Taking Ownership’ key document in ensuring compliance with the Habitat 21. Despite a common genuine wish to Regulations, the Council was resolve the issues, we found that required to undertake an due to the different roles and assessment to show that policies responsibilities of the agencies would have no adverse impact on there were areas where, they held the protected area. different views. 28. The LDF process had proposed 22. To make the best possible progress areas of land suitable for with this matter, we feel that one development including housing. agency should, ‘take ownership’ of the problems to coordinate the 29. These areas included land in the search for a solution. area of Ashby de la Zouch. 23. Ian Butterfield, recognising that 30. Following consultation upon the the agencies were all responsible proposals, the Environment for different aspects and stressing Agency raised objection that Natural England was happy to surrounding the impact of new be heavily involved, suggested that development upon the SAC. the Council, with responsibility for 31. Effectively there is a blanket ban development is ‘best placed’ to 5 on all development in the area host this role . currently. The Current Position 32. If these issues cannot be resolved, the Council will have to reconsider Designation and the LDF the allocation of development of housing over the lifetime of the 24. The River Mease is a small LDF. The Regional Plan took tributary of the River Trent. account of the restrictions so it 25. From its confluence with the Trent would be difficult to argue for a 6 up to Packington, the River Mease reduced housing allocation . is designated at the highest 33. The Council has commissioned a possible European environmental ‘scoping and outline’ water cycle level of Special Area for study but anticipated that it will be Conservation (SAC) as well as a necessary to proceed to a more Site of Special Scientific Interest detailed study7. (SSSI). 34. Twenty‐two planning applications 26. This protection, granted in 2000, remain undetermined due to the requires that planning strategy objection and uncertainty. There is documents be subject to an still a possibility of more Appropriate Assessment (AA). applications. 27. During development of the Local Development Framework (LDF), a
6 Source; Mr Nelson, NWLDC evidence 5 Mr Butterfield, Natural England in response to a question 7 Source; Mr Nelson, NWLDC evidence
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 9 River Mease Working Party
35. This will result in an adverse these have resulted in agreement impact on the Council’s planning to revised approved limits. performance targets. 36. The Council could decide to refuse Packington – AMP5 (2010‐2015) these applications but could face New BOD=10 mg/l appeals. New Ammonia consent = 2 mg/l New Phosphate consent = 1 mg/l Phosphates Source: Severn Trent Water Ltd 37. The main issue relates to water quality and in particular, high 40. Severn Trent Water is committed levels of phosphate. to installing improvements at the wastewater treatment works 38. Although the Packington Waste programmed for 2010 – 2015. Water Treatment Works (WWTW), which serves Ashby de la Zouch 41. These revised limits will reduce the and is one of nine works within the amount of pollutant in the water River Mease catchment, operated but do not meet the European within its current limits8, all targets for this category of agencies accepted that the major protection. 42. Matt Foster told us that the Packington – current, DWF consent = 4729m3/d, wastewater treatment works has, BOD=15 mg/l, Ammonia = in theory, capacity to 5 mg/l accommodate some additional Current Performance: Ave flows development, although not to the 10 = 4600m3/d extent proposed in the LDF . Prior to Sept 2008, Phosphate levels leaving Packington Possible Action to Alleviate c.4 mg/l the Issues Post Sept 2008, Phosphate 43. Severn Trent Water is exploring levels leaving Packington some possible means to alleviate <1 mg/l the issues11. These actions include; Source: Severn Trent Water Ltd a. Additional capacity source of phosphates in the water b. Reduce infiltration was the water treatment works itself (WWTW 80% other sources c. Catchment transfer 9 20% ). d. Effluent transfer
39. The Environment Agency carried 44. The viability of these options is out a Review of Consents (RoC) highly dependent upon the (completed in April 2009) and amount of new development,
8 Source; Mr Foster, Severn Trent Water Ltd, 10 Source; Mr Foster, Severn Trent Water Ltd. evidence evidence 9 Source; Ms Thorpe, Environment Agency, 11 Source; Mr Foster, Severn Trent Water Ltd. evidence evidence
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 10 River Mease, the Impact on Development
proposed in the LDF, affecting the development that involves protected area. wastewater will be permitted in 45. Mr Clarke made a plea for a the area. flexible approach towards what he 50. If the Council’s LDF process has to described as ‘small applications’ allocate sites for future suggesting that private treatment development elsewhere in the facilities could be permitted with district to meet the Regional Plan’s conditions requiring that provision aspirations, it could result in no be made for connection to the significant new development in the public sewer when capacity was Mease catchment within the LDF available without breaching the period (2006 – 2026). limits12 . 51. We have concerns that although 46. Mr Clarke suggested that this individual applicants have found solution would help in the longer‐ solutions to specific issues with term too as the discharge to the planning applications, the overall eventual public sewer would be position is, and will increasingly treated water. over time, having an effect on 47. This would seem an attractive retail use in Ashby de la Zouch. approach but the Environment 52. It is unfortunate if, particularly in Agency does not support private present financial circumstances, a treatment facilities as business is unable to expand or environmentally unacceptable. open due to delays with planning Many householders lack the permission beyond its control. expertise to operate and maintain properly and this can lead to Steps to Improve the 13 problems . Situation 48. Natural England recognise the 53. We welcome Natural England’s complexity of the situation and are initiative in looking to appoint a looking at appointing a project project manager. manager to co‐ordinate land use planning, land management and 54. We are aware that officers of all water quality14. the agencies are addressing the issues with a willingness to work The Likely Impact on Future together. Development in the Area 55. We feel, however, that a co‐ ordinated approach is important
49. Unless the problem is resolved, it and a joint officer working party is possible that no further meeting frequently would be able to address the different aspects of 12 Source; Mr Clarke, Sansom Clarke & the issues most efficiently. Housemartin Designs evidence 13 Source; Ms Thorpe, Environment Agency, evidence 14 Source; Mr Butterfield evidence and Natural England written submission Page 15
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 11 River Mease Working Party
Longer‐term Approach to at the heart of the solution17 and Development in the Area we endorse this approach. 63. The environmental issues need to 56. We feel there is no short‐term be resolved in a way that enables a solution to the complex situation, healthy amount of development in as Mr Butterfield told us, ‘If there the area. was an easy short‐term solution, we would be putting it in place 64. The issues that the officers are already.’15 addressing are complex and involve many parties responsible 57. Any long‐term solution would for the different aspects. appear to require additional investment in the wastewater 65. While progress might appear treatment works over and above frustratingly slow, the Council is that planned in meeting the making every effort to enable agreed new limits. agreement on a future strategy for the area. 58. The Council is now arranging for a full water cycle study and 66. We are confident that officers will anticipates that this will be continue to meet with the other available by May/June 201116. agencies and promote actively the common agreement needed. 59. This study will ensure that the Council has considered all possible 67. We feel that we have completed options to find a long‐term the remit given to us and that the solution. working party completes its work in presenting this report 60. We hope that it will also provide a containing our recommendations. basis for advice to applicants for planning permission. Recommendations 61. Officers continue to meet with the 68. The Working Party recommends other agencies, seeking a common that; plan of action and we welcome the assurance that they are actively 1. Officers continue to liaise with prepared and open to explore all all agencies in seeking to move avenues to achieve the currently towards a long‐term solution. elusive long‐term solution. 2. Further reports on developments and progress be Conclusions made to the Environment 62. Councillor Weston stressed that as Scrutiny Committee. the area was at the ‘Heart of the 3. The Environment Scrutiny National Forest’, ecology should be Committee disbands the River Mease Working Party.
15 Source; Mr Butterfield evidence 17 Source; Councillor Weston, Ashby Woulds 16 Source; Mr Nelson, NWLDC evidence Town Council evidence
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 12 River Mease, the Impact on Development
River Mease Working Party September 2010 Contact: Keith Gordon Senior Scrutiny Officer North West Leicestershire District Council 01530 454538 http://www.nwleicestershire.gov.uk/scrutiny [email protected]
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 13
Appendices ‐ Evidence Witnesses Wednesday 24 March 2010 Chris Tandy, Ashby de la Zouch Civic Society Ian Nelson, Spatial Planning Manager and Chris Elston, Development Control Manager, North West Leicestershire District Council Ian Butterfield, Freshwater Senior Specialist, Natural England Penny Thorpe, Planning Liaison Team Leader and Philip Hulme, Area Environmental Planning Team Leader Environment Agency Matt Foster, Commercial Development Manager, Severn Trent Water Ltd Stephen Clarke, Sansom Clarke also representing Housemartin Designs
Wednesday 23 June 2010 Ian Nelson, Spatial Planning Manager and Chris Elston, Development Control Manager, North West Leicestershire District Council
Monday 20 September 2010 Ian Nelson, Spatial Planning Manager and Chris Elston, Development Control Manager, North West Leicestershire District Council
List of Written Evidence 1. Natural England 2. Environment Agency 3. Severn Trent Water Ltd 4. Ashby de la Zouch Civic Society 5. Ashby de la Zouch Town Council
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 14
Natural England Information for the North West Leicestershire District Council Scrutiny Committee regarding the River Mease SAC and Development Management.
1. Introduction 1.1. Natural England is an independent statutory Non‐Departmental Public Body (NDPB). Natural England was established following the successful passage of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 through Parliament. Natural England formed following the merger of departments within the Countryside Agency, English Nature and the Rural Development Service. 1.2. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development 1.3. Natural England is a statutory consultee on all planning applications which may impact upon the natural environment. We mainly advise Local Planning Authorities on the impact upon designated sites, such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and European sites, such as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC.) The River Mease is designated as both a SAC and a SSSI. Natural England also advise on protected species, biodiversity, landscape and land management considerations. 1.4. In respect to designated sites such as the River Mease SAC, we advise Local Planning Authorities on whether we believe that a planning application would constitute a likely significant effect upon the interest features for which that site is designated. We may advise the LPA that an Appropriate Assessment (AA) is required to assess the impacts that this development may have on the site. The AA is conducted by the LPA, however Natural England would advise on the scope of the assessment. Natural England would comment on an AA if consulted upon by the LPA. 2. River Mease SAC and Conservation Objectives 2.1. The River Mease was notified as a Special Conservation Area in May 2000. The habitats and species for which the River Mease is notified as a SAC can be summarised as; spined loach Cobitis taenia, bullhead Cottus gobio, white‐ clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes, otter Lutra lutra and water courses of plain to montane levels with Ramunculion fluitantis and callitricho‐ Batrachion vegetation 2.2. Natural England has prepared conservation objectives in consultation with the Environment Agency. These were signed off on the 15 December 2008. The conservation objectives relate to both the features of interest of the SSSI and those of the SAC as they are the same. The key conservation objective that is relevant for this site is the objective which relates to levels of
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 15
Orthophosphates. The figure for Orthophosphates set out in the Conservation Objectives for the site is 0.06 mg/l. 2.3. The formal Conservation Objectives for European Sites under the Habitats Regulations are in accordance with paragraph 17 of ODPM Circular 06/2005 (DEFRA Circular 01/2005), which states that; If the decision‐taker concludes that a proposed development (not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site) is likely to significantly affect a European site, they must make an appropriate assessment of the implications of the proposal for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. These relate to each ofe th interest features for which the site was classified and will be provided in more detail by English Nature, which should be consulted for the purposes of the assessment. The scope and content of an appropriate assessment will depend on the nature, location, duration and scale of the proposed project and the interest features of the relevant site. It is important that an appropriate assessment is made in respect of each interest feature for which the site is classified; and for each designation where a site is classified under more than one international obligation. English Nature will advise on a casee ‐by‐cas basis. The decision‐taker can require the applicant to provide such information as may reasonably be required to undertake the assessment. 3. Planning, the Habitats Regulations and the River Mease SAC 3.1. It is the role of the LPA, as it is defined as the competent authority under the Habitats Regulations to ascertain that the proposal being assessed will not adversely affect the integrity of a European Site. 3.2. Natural England’s role in this process is to advise whether or not we believe that an Appropriate Assessment as to the impacts the development may have on the River Mease SAC is required. Natural England is currently consulted on all applications that may affect the River Mease SAC. 3.3. If it cannot be demonstrated that a planning application will have no adverse effect on the River Mease SAC we would expect to see other sustainable drainage options explored. If these options are not Habitat Regulations compliant or fail other planning considerations, then it may be appropriate for the LPA to refuse the permission. 3.4. Natural England recognises the importance of the upcoming Local Development Framework (LDF) will have on future Development in the catchment. This LDF will be subject to a Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) but also, as a strategic document, has the potential to direct development away from the catchment or, through Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD), to provide design guidance to developers who wish to bring forward applications within the Mease catchment.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 16
4. Natural England Position 4.1. Natural England does not object to development within the Mease catchment on principle. It is clear however that the River Mease is a long way from meeting the sites conservation objectives. Development within the catchment must therefore be designed to either reduce current phosphate loading or make no further contribution to moving the site away from the objectives target. 4.2. In responding to planning applications in the Mease catchment we will advise the Local Authority on likely significant effect on the internationally important interest features of the site. 4.3. We will provide support to the authority in their preparation of their appropriate assessment and provide developers with advice on data requirements. We do not provide applicants with a free consultation service nor will we write evidence for them. 4.4. We are in the process of developing clear guidelines as to when development can be considered to be insignificant to help the authority to understand likely impacts. We will also work with the authority and the Environment Agency to help deliver some standard planning advice for future applicants 4.5. We will continue to work with the Environment Agency and others to tackle the other issue that effect the water quality of the Mease including diffuse pollution and the possibility of unlicensed discharges and damaging abstractions. 4.6. Natural England believe that the completion of the Local development Framework is critical in order to clarify the future developments in the catchment as is further development of a more detail water cycle strategy. 5. Other issues Effecting Natural England’s response to applications in the Catchment 5.1. In addition to the impact of development on the River Mease SAC, Natural England will also advise the authority on likely impacts on other nature conservation issues, green infrastructure provision, landscape, protected species and access 6. Other work Natural England is undertaking to improve water quality in the River Mease catchment 6.1. Natural England is utilising agri‐environment scheme targeting within the Mease catchment to reduce the levels of diffuse pollution from agricultural operations. 6.2. Natural England is working on a ‘trigger list’ for Local Planning Authorities regarding applications which we believe are not likely to have a significant effect upon the river Mease. These are likely to be applications such as conservatories or minor extensions, however we are still working on this.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 17
6.3. We are looking at appointing a project manager for the River Mease in order to better co‐ordinate the links between land use planning, land management and water quality.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 18
Environment Agency Information for the North West Leicestershire District Council Scrutiny Committee regarding Water Quality in The River Mease SAC and the impact on proposed development. Date – 18 March 2010.
1.0 As the Governments’ principal advisor on the environment in England and Wales, the Environment Agency plays a major role in the sustainable management and protection of air, land and water, and also have a role in protecting communities from the risk of flooding. Through all our activities we aim to contribute to achieving sustainable development – prosperity along with a healthy, rich and diverse environment for present and future generations. 1.2 In support of its objectives the Environment Agency is involved with land use planning, including advising on regional planning guidance, development plans and planning applications. Our primary role , is to advise on those aspects of draft plans, planning applications, environmental statements and hazardous substances consent applications which relate to our operational functions and particular expertise, using information we already have. 1.3 Under the Habitats Regulations we are a competent authority. As a competent authority, in the exercise of our functions, we have to have regard to the requirements of the Habitats Directive so far as they may be affected by the exercise of those functions. Our role is to review all permits and licences we regulate which may impact on a habitats directive site. As advisors to the Local Planning Authority on matters relating to Town and Country Planning we offer our opinion as to whether a plan or project is likely to have a significant effect on a qualifying interest. We may suggest that an Appropriate Assessment (AA) is required and we will suggest the likely scope of an AA where it affects our interest. We will also provide comments on an AA on matters within our remit. 2.0 Background Information ‐ the Review of Consents 2.1 We have a role in issuing and regulating Consents to Discharge (including those from sewage treatment works) to surface water and groundwaters. 2.2 The Environment Agency has a statutory duty to review the consents under the Habitats Regulations, looking at how the consents we have granted could impact on a habitats site. For the River Mease Special Area of Conservation (SAC) the Review of Consents process was completed in April 2009. 2.3 The Review of Consents (RoC) for the River Mease SAC was based on the maximum discharge allowed by the consent, both in terms of flow and quality conditions ‐ note th actual discharge quality or flow at the time of the review. In practise this means that there is potentially some extra capacity or
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 19
‘headroom’ in the consented amount that could be utilised. This could mean an additional discharge into the river which was not being used at the time when the review was done. 2.4 The outcome of the RoC for the River Mease SAC was that the Environment Agency made changes to consents to reduce the adverse effects, particularly that the strictest possible phosphate emission standards (Best Available Technique) would be implemented at the nine sewage treatment works within the river catchment. The view we took in the RoC was that consent holders should remove their fair share of phosphate adversely affecting the SAC and this should not go beyond Best Available Techniques (BAT) or equivalent. Our Review of Consents showed that, even if the discharges were switched off, there would still be level of phosphate higher than the ideal level determined by Natural England. Due to the poor water quality in the headwaters a further commitment was given to produce a long term action plan. The action plan will also ensure that further options for the removal of phosphates from regulated discharges will be investigated as technology improves. 2.5 It is also the ongoing responsibility of the Environment Agency to assess the impact of any consent variation or modification which might be necessary in the future to ensure that there is no deterioration in the condition of the River Mease SAC. 3.0 Planning and the Habitats Regulations 3.1 It is the role of the primary competent authority under the Habitats Regulation to carry out an appropriate assessment of plans, projects and permissions. For the purposes of the Town and Country planning process the primary competent authority is the Local Planning Authority (LPA). 3.2 If the LPA decides to undertake an appropriate assessment they may require developers to explore sustainable options for the management of foul water. We would expect these options to be discussed and agreed with the sewerage undertaker, Severn Trent Water as part of the planning process. 3.3 If it cannot be demonstrated that the plan or project will have no adverse effect on site integrity then the LPA have to consider the options that are available. For example, options could include the possibility of upgrading sewage treatment processes, or pumping flows to a different sewage treatment works that discharges outside of the River Mease catchment. It may be that the most appropriate option is that the development does not go ahead. 3.4 The Local Development Frameworks (LDF) are a key document in ensuring that development is planned in accordance to the requirements of the Habitats Regulations, as a Habitats Regulation Assessment would have to be undertaken as part of the development of the LDF.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 20
4.0 Environment Agency Position 4.1 In terms of responding to planning applications in a sewered area we are requesting confirmation from the sewerage undertaker (in this instance Severn Trent Water Limited) that they will be able to accept the flow that would be generated by the development. If this confirmation cannot be provided we will nmaintai an objection to the proposal. 4.2 For development within a sewered area the local planning authority can ask for advice from Severn Trent Water Limited on whether increased flows from any development have already been accounted for or can be accommodated within the existing sewage treatment works permit. The local authority can also ask the Environment Agency advice on the likely impact of any flows which would be in excess of permit limits. 4.3 We expect developments discharging domestic sewage to connect to the public foul sewer where it is reasonable to do so. We also expect discharges of trade effluent to connect to the public foul sewer , where it is reasonable to do so, and subject to the sewerage undertaker granting a trade effluent consent or entering into a trade effluent agreement. 4.4 Where premises rely on private sewage disposal facilities, these depend on proper operation and regular maintenance to function effectively. If this does not happen, the facilities are prone to failure, causing pollution of land and/or watercourses. Many householders lack the expertise to properly operate or maintain private sewage disposal facilities. They are unaware of the impacts until the facility fails or are they are unwilling/unable to spend potentially significant sums of money on maintaining or replacing the plant when necessary. 4.5 Private sewage disposal facilities serving multiple premises will need to have appropriate legally binding agreements in place for their operation and maintenance. Where no such agreement is in place, or a dispute arises as to the responsibilities of individual householders, this frequently leads to the facility not being properly operated or maintained. Connection to a public sewer significantly reduces the risk of pollution from a householders sewage facility. It also means that if there are problems with the public sewerage system and public sewage treatment works serving those premises, funding is available through Ofwat and the AMP (Asset Management Plan) process to resolve those problems. 4.6 Connection to a public sewer is the preferred option under both the Building Regulations and DETR March 1999 Circular (C/399). Developers need to demonstrate to us that they have fully explored all the ways their development might connect to a public sewer. We will oppose the use of private sewage disposal facilities within publicly sewered areas as environmentally unacceptable and object to such proposals at the planning stage. If NWLDC choose to accept the proposals then they will need to satisfy themselves that they have sufficient enforceable) monitoring in place that
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 21
enable the facility to be maintained in line with controls equivalent to a public sewerage discharge. 5.0 Other issues within the EA remit affecting a SAC 5.1 The Environment Agency provides advice to the LPA on other issues including flood risk and contaminated land which may also have an impact on the integrity of the SAC.
End 18 March 2010.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 22
Severn Trent Water Ltd Information for the North West Leicestershire District Council Scrutiny Committee re: Water Quality in the River Mease and proposed development The River Mease in Leicestershire is a SAC (Special Area of Conversation). This means that both Natural England and the Environment Agency are working towards improving the quality of the water in the river, particularly reducing the levels of phosphorus to 0.06mg/l. We have a number of sewage treatment works along the river from which we discharge treated water ‐ for example our Packington sewage treatments works, which serves the community in Ashby de la Zouch. Recently, due to development proposals in the area, Packington has come under scrutiny, in particular its ability to be able to treat any additional waste which will come with the proposed new developments. Packington sewage treatment works currently operates within both its flow and quality consents. However, to support the Environment Agency’s plans to further improve the water quality in the River Mease, we have an investment plan in place for the next five years (2010‐2015) to ensure we meet improved water quality consents. These consents will see a reduction in the amount of ammonia (to 2mg/l) and phosphorus (to 1mg/l) in our final effluent. We will continue to work closely with the EA to ensure that we have the measures in place to meet the improved standards. Can our sewage treatment works cope with development in Ashby de la Zouch? We believe that Packington sewage treatment works has room available within its current consent parameters to facilitate additional growth. We completed an assessment in November 2009 which found that the works could accommodate the waste from an additional 710 new domestic dwellings. We have shared the findings of this investigation with the Environment Agency and hope that they will consider this investigation when approving planning applications fore th area. However, we have also worked closely with North West Leicestershire District Council (NWLDC) to understand the level of additional growth in the area over the next 15‐20 years (to 2026). The figures provided by NWLDC estimates this growth will be a minimum of 1000 new dwellings (+/‐ 10 per cent). This level of development proposal would push our treatment works beyond its current consent limits. Therefore we recognise that in order to ensure we continue to deliver our obligation under the Water Industry Act (to effectively treat waste from new development); we will continue to assess a number investment options. We are therefore key contributors to the Water Cycle Strategy currently under development by NWLDC. In addition to liaison with the Environment Agency and NWLDC, we are also continuing to talk to key development companies who have interests in the Ashby area. These include developers who have already submitted planning applications, as well as those considering submission. ‐ENDS‐
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 23
Ashby de la Zouch Civic Society TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY HALLAM LAND MANAGEMENT LTD
PROOF OF EVIDENCE ON ECOLOGY MR CHRISTOPHER TANDY ON BEHALF OF PACKINGTON NOOK RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
APPEAL AGAINST NON‐DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER USES AND ANCILLARY WORKS (OUTLINE APPLICATION – ALL MATTERS RESERVED), LAND AT LOWER PACKINGTON ROAD AND PACKINGTON NOOK LANE, ASHBY‐DE‐LA‐ZOUCH, LEICESTERSHIRE
PLANNING APPEAL REFERENCE APP/G2435/A/09/2102468/NWF LPA REFERENCE 08/01588/OUTM
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 25
1 Qualifications and Experience 1.1 My name is Christopher Tandy. I am Vice Chairman of Ashby de la Zouch Civic Society, responsible for planning issues. I am past chairman of PNRA (Packington Nook Residents Association) and a current member of the executive committee. I have lived in Ashby de la Zouch for 35 years. I am a Chartered Engineer. 1.2 I represented Ashby de la Zouch Civic Society at the Eip of the East Midlands Regional Plan. 1.3 Ashby de la Zouch Civic Society has objected to the application relating to this appeal together with PNRA, Ashby Town Council, Packington Parish Council, Leicestershire County Council and many statutory bodies. 2 The basis of our objection to building at this site 2.1 PNRA supports the putative reasons for refusal put forward by North West Leicestershire District Council (“the Council”) following consideration of the application at the 2nd June meeting of the Planning Committee. 2.2 The Council have not had sufficient opportunity through the progression of the Local Development Framework to determine the scale, suitability and appropriate location for development in Ashby de la Zouch to meet future growth requirements. Particular consideration must be given to the town's sensitive location and its potential impact on the River Mease SAC. Local residents are extremely concerned that the historic town and local environment would be damaged by large scale development and in particular building at this site. 3 Infrastructure of Ashby de la Zouch (see appendix 1) 3.1 Ashby is a small market town which has grown by 36% over the last 15 years years with development of executive housing and warehousing almost encircling the original town. Ashby's housing % growth has consistently outstripped that of Coalville over the last 15 years. 3.2 The proposed sites put forward for consideration in the LDF represent 4300 houses or 70 % increase in the size of the town. These proposals are now under consideration in the development of the LDF. Core Strategy Options are currently looking at 500 to 2400 extra houses. 3.3 There are currently approximately 5600 dwellings in the town. Plans have already been approved to build over 400 additional dwellings in the town and several significant warehousing developments. 3.4 We consider that Ashby's level of housing growth in recent years has had a negative impact on the water quality of the River Mease SAC.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 26
4 Gilwiskaw Brook (see appendix 2&3) 4.1 Two sources of the Brook arise in Smisby and flow south through the town of Ashby de la Zouch. Other tributaries arising in the east, join the stream south of Ashby . The brook then runs through open countryside to Packington. Run‐ off from the A42 road is directed into the Gilwiskaw Brook without mitigation. 4.2 Immediately south of the village of Packington the brook is designated as part of the River Mease SAC. 4.3 A further tributary to the west of Packington joins to the south of the village. This tributary carries the outflow from the Sewage works. A further tributary flows in from the east. The Gilwiskaw then flows across open countryside to join the River Mease. 4.4 The Gilwhiskaw Brook and its tributaries have been used by the houses in Ashby as discharges for surface water and most recent developments have utilised this brook for discharges. The discharge from Ashby housing and the A42 trunk road run into the brook north of the village of Packington. Sewage and foul water from Ashby is collected and piped across to Packington where it is treated and the cleansed outflow directed into the Gilwhiskaw south of the village of Packington. At this point the brook is protected by SAC status. 4.5 The Sewers run parallel and in close proximity to the brook between Ashby and Packington. 4.6 Examination of environmental records held by the Leicestershire Environmental Resources Centre show that the upper reaches of the Gilwiskaw were populated with species present in the SAC (crayfish, bullshead, spiney loach, water voles etc.) along most of its length. 4.7 However the last protected species sighting in the northerly and easterly branches was recorded in 2003. Recent environmental surveys supplied as evidence in various planning applications since 2006 have reported no protected species in the upper reaches of the brook. 4.8 Developments on the edges of Ashby have changed the course of the brook, deepened channels, removed vegetation cover, culverted large lengths of its course and added surface water flows from developments through drainage pipes into the main flow. 4.9 Effectively the Brook is now denuded of protected species from its source to the south of Ashby and can only be considered as a surface water channel. 4.10 Proposals have now been submitted by the appellant to modify a large portion of the remaining unaltered brook to the south of Ashby. The plan involves diverting the brook to accommodate housing and to create a large flood retention ponds (39000 cubic metres), and restrict the flow by the creation of a dam and a 1metre diameter restrictor orifice to control flow rates.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 27
This will effectively mean that the brook will only have 800 metres of unaltered natural flow before it enters the SAC. 4.11 Article 10 of the Habitats Directive requires that planning and development policies manage features such as rivers and their banks that because of their linear and continuous structuree ar essential for dispersal and genetic exchange. 4.12 Section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 allows for restrictions to be imposed outside an SAC in order to protect the integrity of the SAC. 4.13 Natural England insist on appropriate assessment of proposed development sites within 2Km of an SAC and that restrictions or mitigation needed are considered on a case by case basis. 4.14 Considering the unfavourable condition of the SAC and its registration as a sensitive area due to eutrophic outflows we consider that further urbanisation of the brook could adversely impact the integrity of the SAC. 5. Sewage and Foul Water (see appendix 4,5,6,7,8) 5.1 The sewage system for Ashby town was constructed in the mid 19th century and runs parallel to the Gilwiskaw Brook to Packington. Sewage is treated by the Packington STW. Cleaned discharge from this works is directed into a short tributary which joins the SAC a few hundred metres from the outflow. 5.2 The current system is not coping. It is rated as a high risk site due to its operating above 100% DWF and moderate BOD conformance. The Mease was registered in October 2007 as a Sensitive Area due to high eutrophic outflows. 5.3 The RSS appropriate assessment reports excessive phosphate levels due to sewage outflow and that further housing development would exacerbate the problem. It also states that there is no solution to this problem. 5.4 The condition of the SAC is deteriorating and its rating has fallen in the last fives years to “unsatisfactory” (ref; Environment Agency condition reports) 5.5 The SFRA for North West Leicestershire reports 21 sewage flooding incidents in the Ashby area in the last 10 years. Ashby suffered 36% of the sewer floods in NW Leicestershire despite having only 14% of the district housing. The number of Ashby incidents is understated as it shows no incidents in Packington which regularly sufferers sewage floods. JBA Consultants, FLOAT, and Ashby Civic Society reported flooding to NWLDC occurring in July 2001, September 2002, June 2007, August, September and October 2008. These reports covered 9 incidents. Detritus from the sewers escapes subsequently is washed into the Gilwhiskaw and Mease SAC. 5.6 In 2007 there have been 4 major sewerage blowouts in Packington and 2 blockages in Ashby town, the last one taking 2 weeks to clear at a cost of £30,000. (ref; Severn Trent report)
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 28
5.7 Last year a local resident was hospitalised having been infected by raw sewerage whilst running in fields near Packington. (case recorded with Severn Trent). 5.8 The last sewerage overflow in October 2007 From Packington STW killed 18,000 fish in the protected River Mease SAC. Severn Trent were fined £13,500 for this event. 5.9 The Regional Plan Appropriate Assessment recognises that sewage effluent discharges puts additional pressure on water quality and have the potential to damage designated features. It also states that adequate water treatment capacity must be in place before further housing development takes place. 5.10 Close liaison with Water Authorities is recommended by the RSS before further development is considered. 5.11 We conclude therefore that the current situation is totally unsatisfactory and the condition of the SAC is degrading due to urbanisation of the catchment area. Any plans to develop Ashby further can only exacerbate the already unsatisfactory condition of the SAC. 6. Impact on the River Mease 6.1 The River Mease is a designated SAC with several rare species and its condition is currently unsatisfactory. The developers are required to install SUDS into their surface water systems so that the risk of contamination is reduced. 6.2 The surface water discharge and the sewerage discharge volumes will significantly increase the flow in the Gilwhiskaw and hence the Mease. Almost certainly the Gilwhiskaw will change in depth and velocity. This could impact bank erosion, the meander and the flooding of the brook. (see evidence in AA). 6.3 Flooding will leach out nutrients and fertiliser from the adjacent fields. Sewage escapes from inspection pits during heavy rainfall (see photos in SFRA) will be washed into the brook flow. Silt and detritus will be carried down into the SAC from this erosion and increased flow. 6.4 The flow rate for the protected species present should be maintained within 10% ( see report from EA). This is unlikely to be achieved if the development proceeds. The bottom of the Mease is sandy and a covering of silt would be disastrous for the habitat. The sandy bottom is important for gestation of fish eggs. Faster flow could flush light gravel or transfer silt into the area. Bullheads and white crayfish are particularly sensitive to flow. 6.5 We conclude that flooding and increases in flow rate will be detrimental to the SAC.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 29
7 Findings from Regional Plan Appropriate Assessment River Mease SAC 7.1 The Appropriate assessment identified inadequate water supply and poor water quality to be issues for the River Mease SAC. 7.2 There is a lack of available water in the river and abstractions are over licensed. 7.3 Water efficiency measures and SUDS are required to manage surface water run‐off upstream of the SAC. 7.4 The site is under pressure from declining water quality. 7.5 The River Mease suffers from excessively high phosphate levels. 7.6 Packington STW suffers from inadequate sewage capacity. 7.7 Nearby housing development could have an effect on abstraction causing possible risk to the SAC. 7.8 Flood defences may adversely affect water quality. 7.9 A natural flow regime is required for the maintenance of natural erosion and sedimentation processes and hence the channel morphology. The structure of and composition of bank side and aquatic vegetation should be maintained. 7.10 Adequate water treatment infrastructure and capacity must be available before any further housing development takes place. 7.11 Water abstraction, inappropriate drainage,over‐deepened river channels and sewage discharge have the potential to damage designated features. 7.12 Packington STW is at high risk of not having additional capacity for a significant increase in population. 7.13 Water quality of the Mease is affected by discharges from Packington STW. 7.14 Additional sewage discharges would exacerbate existing problems with phosphate in the SAC. There is no current solution to the problem of high phosphate levels. 7.15 Additional problems could be caused by increased surface run off. Pollutants and sediment can have adverse effect on annex 2 species. 7.16 The SAC seems to be more affected by water quality from discharges than from abstraction. 7.17 The site is already under pressure from abstraction,water quality and flow regime. Habitat quality is likely to decline. 8 Recommendations from Regional Plan Appropriate Assessment River Mease SAC 8.1 The regions internationally designated natural assets should receive the highest protection. The competent authority shall give effect to the land use
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 30
plan only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site. 8.2 General measures may not be sufficient to avoid adverse effects on this site in the future. 8.3 Levels of planned housing growth and development represent a significant risk to the SAC 8.4 Monitoring recommended to provide stronger evidence base (address in AMR). Future reviews of housing provision will need to give particular attention to current and projected public water supply and sewage treatment capacity headroom. 8.5 It also demands that water cycle studies be undertaken to improve water quality. 8.6 Adequate water treatment infrastructure and capacity must be available before any further housing development takes place. 8.7 Account needs to be taken of the effect of run‐off from developments upstream of the designated site. 8.8 Any mitigation must be secured and implemented before development actions are undertaken. 9 Conclusion of Regional Plan Appropriate Assessment River Mease SAC 9.1 The Appropriate Assessment concluded that there would be an adverse effect on site integrity, ( or that it was not possible to prove there would be no adverse effect). Avoidance or mitigation is required. 9.2 Residual issue for which further measures may be required to avoid significant adverse effects on integrity, to be reviewed during consultation. 10. Summary and Conclusion 10.1 Our evidence supports the views of the environment agency and the conclusions presented within the Appropriate Assessment of the Regional Plan. We conclude therefore that recent developments around Ashby de la Zouch have had an adverse impact on the condition of the River Mease SAC. 10.2 The River Mease is is in an unsatisfactory condition, is registered as a nutrient sensitive area and is suffering from excessively high phosphate levels. 10.3 The River Mease has one of the very worst water quality statuses in the country and one of the worst predicted recovery rates. Granting permission for any further development before actions have been undertaken to improve water quality will have catastrophic impacts. 10.4 It would also be in contradiction to advice from PPS23 section 6, the Water Framework Directive section B2 and the Habitats Directive.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 31
10.5 Further major developments such as the one proposed by the appellant for Ashby de la Zouch should be resisted. 10.6 The applicant has not submitted systematic and conclusive evidence to support his claim that there will be no significant effect to the River Mease SAC. 10.7 We therefore respectfully ask that you to dismiss this appeal. 11. Attachments:
appendix 1 appendix 2 appendix 3 appendix 4 appendix 5 appendix 6 appendix 7 appendix 8
END
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 32
APPENDIX 1 Dwelling Growth Statistics
N.W Leicestershire Ashby Coalville No. Dwelling in 34983 4068 11840 1991 No. Dwellings in 35393 4800 13200 2001 % Growth 1% 18% 11% 1991/2001 No. Dwellings in 39273 5600 14016 2007 % Growth 11% 17% 6.00% 2001/2007
Sources: National Census 1991,2001, Annual monitoring reports NWLDC and Leicestershire C.C.
Summary of Environmental Responses from Key public Agencies to proposed NWLDC Core Strategy 1. Note that development in the catchment of the River Mease may be restricted due to capacity issues at Packington‐ GOEM 2. Note that water quality in the River Mease is an issue. Future development will need to seek improvements‐ Environment Agency 3. Small amount of housing for Ashby is supported given the River Mease SAC, the constrained road system and it’s a dormitory settlement for the West Midlands‐ Leicestershire County Council
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 33
APPENDIX 2
Map Showing Potential Major Housing Site and Buffer Zones Around the River Mease SAC
34 Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire
APPENDIX 3
Map showing Gilwiskaw catchment area and tributaries. SAC starts immediately south of Packington village. Wks to the west of Packington is Severn Trent STW discharging into Gilwiskaw tributary
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 35
Map showing Gilwiskaw tributaries.(Blue).Green sections of river bed have been extensively modified due to urban development.
36 Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire
APPENDIX 4
Map Showing Location Of Sewer flooding 1996‐2006 .Source NW Leicestershire SFRA
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 37
APPENDIX 5
Extract From: Environment Agency website 3rd Sept 2009 Severn Trent Water fined £13,500 for polluting Gilwiskaw Brook Author: Emily Poyser
Date published: 2-Oct-2008
Keywords: Pollution
On 2nd October 2008, Severn Trent Water Limited pleaded guilty at Hinckley Magistrates Court to one charge relating to polluting Gilwiskaw Brook, a tributary of the River Mease. The charge was brought by the Environment Agency under the Water Resources Act 1991. Severn Trent Water was fined £13,500 and ordered to pay costs of £4,500. For the Environment Agency, Jill Crawford told the court that Severn Trent Water Ltd operates Packington sewage treatment works. On the 1 October, 2007, the Environment Agency was informed by Severn Trent Water Ltd of a discharge from the Packington works. The Gilwiskaw Brook, which the Packington works discharges into, was running a milky white colour which indicated pollution. On the 5 October 2007, a biological investigation was carried out on the Mease and Gilwiskaw Brook. This showed that there had been serious effects on the fish stock in the waters. A fish mortality survey showed that an estimated 18,000 fish were killed from 12 different species, virtually wiping out the fish population at the point where the Gilwiskaw Brook discharges into the River Meade. On the 31 October 2007, Severn Trent Water Ltd was interviewed under caution at the Stafford office of the Environment Agency. They admitted to the discharge of the sewage into the Gilwiskaw Brook, which had been caused by the incorrect installation of monitoring equipment. Speaking after the case Joe Adams, an Environment Agency Officer involved in the investigation said: “The River Mease and Gilwiskaw Brook are of European and National importance with regards to their species and habitat. This is recognised by their status as Special Area of Conservation and Site of Special Scientific Interest. The pollution occurred due to the incorrect instillation of monitoring equipment which did not alert Severn Trent Water Ltd to problems at the sewage works. This resulted in storm sewage entering the Gilwiskaw Brook and subsequently River Mease causing a significant pollution resulting in excess of 18000 fish being killed”. In mitigation the court heard that Seven Trent Water put forward an early guilty plea, gave prompt reporting of the incident to the Environment Agency and gave full cooperation. -ends- For Further Information for media contact Emily Poyser/ Lyn Fraley on 0121 711 5855/5829. Contact for media only. All other enquiries contact 08708 506 506
38 Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire
APPENDIX 6 EXTRACT FROM: North West Leicestershire District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Final Report May 2008 by WS ATKINS Significant flooding of roads has occurred in Packington and Ashby de la Zouch from Gilwiskaw Brook. 1 property and 5 gardens were flooded following heavy rainfall in July 2001. The flooding of Mill Street during the July 2001 event cause disruption to the residents of Packinton. Several other heavy rainfall events have resulted in flooding of roads and gardens in Packington with the most recent events in June 2007. Flooding from sewers can occur when the artificial drainage system is overwhelmed, hydraulically, becomes blocked or suffers structural failure or pump failure. Blockage and structural failure incidents tend to be isolated and unpredictable. Severn Trent Water is responsible for the management of the urban drainage system throughout North West Leicestershire including surface water and foul sewerage. Severn Trent Water has procedures in place to respond to and rectify such incidents, which are also recorded on databases to inform maintenance and improvement plans. Plate 1 shows an example of flooding from sewers when there were problems with the drainage capacity within Packington during the July 2001 flood event; however flooding from the drains was masked by the flooding of the road later by Gilwiskaw Brook.
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 39
Drainage problems in Packington during July 2001 (Source: FLOAT). A review of areas where the sewer system has been overwhelmed can potentially identify under capacity of the drainage system or where the system does not provide an adequate level of service.
40 Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire
Packington Sewage Pumping station showing system overwhelmed during floods of 2001 (source Float)
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 41
PENDIX 7
42 Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire
Contents of a letter received from;
Ashby de la Zouch Town Council Scrutiny Examination Of River Mease Water Quality Impact On Development I refer to your letter of 20 January which I have presented to the meeting of the Councils Planning Committee. The Committee is extremely concerned that appropriate development in Ashby could possibly be curtailed as a consequence of sewerage problems. The Committee considers appropriate development in Ashby is vital to the economic wellbeing of the Town. On that basis, it requests that representation should be made to the Severn Trent Water Authority to take steps as a matter of urgency to resolve the sewerage issues so that development can proceed on a timely basis. The Committee is also anxious to learn whether this situation affects the implementation of development which currently has the benefit of Planning Permission. Please advise me on this issue.
C R Gay Town Clerk
Scrutiny in North West Leicestershire 43