CLP.Ev.4C
Bracknell Forest Council
Water Cycle Study: Phase 1 Scoping Report
Final Report
December 2017
Bracknell Forest Council Time Square Market Street Bracknell Berkshire RG12 1JD
JBA Project Manager Paul Eccleston JBA Consulting 8a Castle Street Wallingford Oxfordshire UNITED KINGDOM OX10 8DL 01491 836688
Revision History Revision Ref / Date Amendments Issued to Issued Version 1.0 Bracknell Forest Council 5th May 2017 Version 1.1 Initial BFC review comments Bracknell Forest Council 13th June 2017 addressed
Version 1.2 Addresses review comments from BFC, TW, EA, Affinity Water and SE Bracknell Forest Council 30th August 2017 Water. Version 1.3 Final Scoping Phase Report Bracknell Forest Council 2nd October 2017 Version 1.4 Minor amendments Bracknell Forest Council 18th October 2017 Version 2.0 Minor amendments Bracknell Forest Council 1st December Contract This report describes work commissioned by Bracknell Forest Council, by an email dated 3rd March 2017. Bracknell Forest Council’s representatives for the contract were Marie O'Sullivan and Julia Greene. Holly Hart, Richard Pardoe and Paul Eccleston of JBA Consulting carried out this work.
Prepared by ...... Holly Hart BSc Assistant Analyst
Richard Pardoe MEng Assistant Analyst
Reviewed by ...... Paul Eccleston BA CertWEM CEnv MCIWEM C.WEM Technical Director
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 i
Purpose This document has been prepared as a Final Report for Bracknell Forest Council. JBA Consulting accepts no responsibility or liability for any use that is made of this document other than by the Client for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared. JBA Consulting has no liability regarding the use of this report except to Bracknell Forest Council.
Acknowledgements JBA Consulting would like to thank Bracknell Forest Council, the Environment Agency, Thames Water, Affinity Water and South East Water for their assistance in preparing this report. Copyright © Jeremy Benn Associates Limited 2017 Carbon Footprint A printed copy of the main text in this document will result in a carbon footprint of 412g if 100% post- consumer recycled paper is used and 525g if primary-source paper is used. These figures assume the report is printed in black and white on A4 paper and in duplex. JBA is aiming to reduce its per capita carbon emissions.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 ii
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 iii
Executive Summary
Introduction In February 2017, JBA Consulting was commissioned by Bracknell Forest Council (BFC) to undertake a Phase 1 Water Cycle Study (WCS) which assesses the potential issues relating to future development within Bracknell Forest and the impacts on water supply, wastewater collection and waste water treatment. The Water Cycle Study is required to assess the constraints and requirements that will arise from potential growth on the water infrastructure. New homes require the provision of clean water, safe disposal of wastewater and protection from flooding. The allocation of large numbers of new homes in certain locations may result in the capacity of existing available infrastructure being exceeded, a situation that could potentially cause service failures to water and wastewater customers, adverse impacts to the environment, or high costs for the upgrade of water and wastewater assets being passed on to the bill payers. In addition to increased housing demand, future climate change presents further challenges to pressures on the existing water infrastructure network, including increased intensive rainfall events and a higher frequency of drought events. Sustainable planning for water must now take this into account. The water cycle can be seen in Figure 1 below, and shows how the natural and man- made processes and systems interact to collect, store or transport water in the environment.
Figure 1: The Water Cycle
Source: Environment Agency – Water Cycle Study Guidance
This study will assist the council to select and develop sustainable development allocations where there is minimal impact on the environment, water quality, water resources, infrastructure, and flood risk. This has been achieved by identifying areas where there may be conflict between any proposed development, the requirements of the environment and by recommending potential solutions to these conflicts. The WCS has been carried out in co-operation with the Environment Agency, Thames Water, Affinity Water and South East Water. Whilst there are no anticipated issues which indicate that the planned scale, location, and timing of planned development within Bracknell Forest is unachievable from the perspective of supplying water, significant capacity issues in waste water treatment have been identified in four of the five WwTW in Bracknell Forest. Further information is required to understand the significance of these issues, particularly in the Ascot and Easthampstead Park WwTW catchments.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 iv
Early developer engagement will, as in all major developments, be essential to ensure that sufficient time is available to build capacity upgrades prior to the development connecting to the network. This Water Cycle Study also identified whether infrastructure upgrades are expected to be required to accommodate planned growth. Timely planning and provision of infrastructure upgrades will be undertaken through cooperation between Bracknell Forest Council, Thames Water, the Environment Agency, and specific developers. Development Scenarios and Policy Issues This Water Cycle Study is an assessment of the impacts of planned development within Bracknell Forest. The Draft SHELAA identified 82 sites from a "call for sites", in addition to a number already in the planning process and an estimated number through windfall. Sites based in neighbouring authority areas that may use infrastructure within Bracknell Forest are also taken into account. This Water Cycle Study is key evidence for deciding the final site allocations to meet growth needs within Bracknell Forest. Legal agreements under the Town and Country Planning Act Section 106 agreement, and Community Infrastructure Levy agreements are not intended to be used to obtain funding for water or wastewater infrastructure. It is not therefore necessary for BFC to identify requirements for developers to contribute towards the cost of upgrades in its Local Plan. The Water Industry Act sets out arrangements for connections to public sewers and water supply networks, and developers should ensure that they engage at an early stage with Thames Water to ensure that site specific capacity checks can be undertaken, and where necessary, additional infrastructure is constructed to accommodate the development. Where permitted, Thames Water may seek developer contributions towards infrastructure upgrades. Upgrades to water resources and wastewater treatment works are funded through the company business plans. Water Resources The administrative area of Bracknell Forest Council is located within the Environment Agency Abstraction Licensing Strategies (ALS) for the Thames and the Loddon. Both ALS have restricted water available for licensing and all sites have been considered under serious water stress by the EA. The two Water Resource Management Plans (WRMPs) demonstrate the pressures on water resources in the Affinity Water and South East Water supply zones with increasing demand, population growth, resource uncertainty, the impacts of climate change and the need to reduce some abstractions to reduce their impacts on the environment. The latest DCLG forecast for household growth within Affinity Water's Water Resource Zone 6 - WRZ6 (29%) is significantly higher than allowed for in the WRMP (20%). However, Affinity's analysis of recent household growth indicates that it has been lower than DCLG forecasts. Affinity Water is currently developing its new household and population forecast to be included into the next WRMP19. The new forecast will take into account growth identified by local authorities and district councils. There is sufficient time, within the water resource management planning process, for changes in demand as a result of household growth to be identified and addressed through supply- side or demand management measures. The latest DCLG forecast for household growth within South East Water's WRZ4 (23%) is slightly lower than allowed for in the WRMP (27%). Therefore, the WRMP is based on a robust estimate of household growth. Both companies, along with other water companies in South East England, are co-operating on developing population and household forecasts for the next WRMP in 2019. Whilst neither water company has relied on new homes being more water-efficient than existing metered homes, the opportunity, through the planning system, to ensure that new homes do meet the higher standard of 110l/person/day, at nominal additional cost to the developer, would be in line with general principals of sustainable development, and reducing energy consumed in the treatment and supply of water. The overall RAG assessment for Bracknell Forest’s water resources is green, on the basis that there is sufficient time to address the supply demand issues identified in the next WRMP. No further assessment of water resources is recommended for the Phase 2 Outline Water Cycle Study.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 v
Water Supply Infrastructure All sites within Winkfield parish, plus site WAR17 within Warfield parish, would be served by Affinity Water. The additional demand of these developments would lead to unacceptable reductions in pressure during periods of peak demand, and therefore infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. No additional assessments are required within the Affinity Water supply area in the phase 2 outline WCS. All sites within the Binfield, Bracknell Town, Crowthorne, Sandhurst parishes and the majority of Warfield parish would be served by South East Water who have confirmed that they can provide supply to all of the sites proposed in their area. No additional assessments are required within the South East Water supply area in the phase 2 outline WCS. Wastewater Collection and Treatment The TW RAG assessment prepared for this scoping stage only considered clusters 1 to 6. The assessment indicates that, for the majority of these clusters, infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. The exceptions are cluster 3 (where there is adequate foul sewerage capacity) and cluster 5, which TW have given a red assessment, indicating that infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, and significant constraints have been identified. No assessment has been made for sites not located within clusters 1 to 6 at this scoping stage. Thames Water are preparing a growth study including modelling to provide a more detailed assessment of how growth will be accommodated. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should revisit this assessment, once the ongoing growth study being prepared for Thames Water is complete. This should include all clusters and stand-alone sites. Sewerage Undertakers have a duty under Section 94 of the Water Industry Act 1991 to provide sewerage and treat wastewater arising from new domestic development. Except where strategic upgrades are required to serve very large or multiple developments, infrastructure upgrades are usually only implemented following an application for a connection, adoption, or requisition from a developer. Early developer engagement with water companies is therefore essential to ensure that sewerage capacity can be provided without delaying development. Thames Water's preferred method of surface water disposal is using a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) discharging to ground or open watercourses, with connection to the sewerage system seen as the last option. Bracknell is, however, predominantly situated on clay and therefore infiltration is unviable across most of the borough, meaning watercourses or public sewers are the only viable means of draining a site. Wastewater Treatment Works Flow Permit Assessment The assessment indicates that Ascot, Bracknell and Easthampstead Park WwTWs are all forecast to exceed their permitted dry weather flow as a result of planned growth during the plan period, and indeed that Ascot did exceed its permitted DWF in 2015. In the case of Bracknell WwTW, the future exceedance is as a result of planned growth in Bracknell Forest only. In the case of Ascot and Easthampstead Park, it is as a result of planned growth in both Bracknell Forest and in neighbouring authorities. It is therefore anticipated that these three WwTWs will require capacity upgrades during the plan period. TWUL have given Bracknell an "amber" assessment, indicating that treatment upgrades will be required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should, working with Thames Water, investigate further the headroom capacity at Bracknell WwTW, which is forecast to exceed its flow permit capacity during AMP7 (2020-2025). TWUL have given Easthampstead Park a "red" assessment, indicating that treatment upgrades will be required to serve proposed growth, and that major constraints have been identified. The nature of these constraints has not yet been stated. TWUL gave Ascot an "amber" assessment, but this has been raised to a "red" as a result of the DWF permit exceedance in 2015. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should, working with Thames Water, investigate further the constraints on providing treatment capacity at Ascot and Easthampstead, or alternative solutions to treat elsewhere.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 vi
Sandhurst WwTW is forecast to have sufficient headroom capacity to accommodate additional flows as a result of planned growth in both Bracknell Forest and Hart District. Billingbear WwTW is a very small works, operating at its flow capacity. There is no planned growth in this catchment, and no capacity for even minor windfall development, without a treatment works upgrade being required. Water Quality Impact Assessment Five WwTW were identified serving Bracknell Forest and neighbouring LPAs and a qualitative assessment was carried out on the likely effect of proposed development on water quality. It was found that, Ascot, Bracknell, Easthampstead Park and Sandhurst had the potential to experience a deterioration in WFD classification in nearby watercourses. To quantitatively assess the impacts of growth on water quality, a detailed water quality modelling assessment is required. This should take growth in neighbouring authorities into account and, where appropriate SIMCAT water quality models already exist, should be undertaken on a river sub-catchment scale, in order to assess the cumulative impact of growth within several treatment works' catchments. This is particularly important on the River Blackwater where point source effluent discharge is an ongoing pressure affecting the ecological status of the water body and where a significant amount of growth is proposed at a series of WwTWs along its reach. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should include water quality impact modelling of growth at Ascot, Bracknell, Easthampstead Park and Sandhurst WwTWs. Wastewater Treatment Works Odour Assessment An odour screening assessment was completed to identify sites that are in close proximity to existing WwTWs where odour may be a cause of nuisance and complaints. Results concluded that seven sites may be at risk of experiencing odour due to their proximity to existing WwTWs, and a further assessment should be conducted. All other sites are unlikely to be impacted by odour from WwTW. Odour assessments, where the screening assessment indicates that they are required, should be undertaken by site developers. No additional assessment of odour impact is required in the Stage 2 WCS. Flood Risk A detailed assessment of flood risk can be found within the Bracknell Forest Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, which is to be published imminently. An assessment was carried out to determine whether increased discharges of treated effluent from each WwTW due to the additional development within Bracknell Forest could lead to an increase in fluvial flood risk from the receiving watercourse. This assessment was carried out at all the WwTW that will receive additional flows from the identified development sites, and results showed that the impact of increased effluent flows is not predicted to have a significant impact upon flood risk in any of the receiving watercourses. No additional assessment of flood risk from wastewater effluent discharges is required in the Stage 2 WCS. Environmental Constraints and Opportunities Data from the Environment Open data from the EA were used to create a map showing sites with environmental designations within Bracknell Forest in order to identify sites likely to be impacted by additional discharge from WwTWs. The map should be used in conjunction with Sustainability Appraisals (SA) and evidence studies where these are available. No additional assessments of impact upon designated sites are recommended for the Phase 2 Outline WCS. Climate Change A qualitative assessment has been undertaken to assess the potential impacts of climate change on the assessments made within this water cycle study. The assessment used a matrix which considers both the potential impact of climate change on the assessment in question, and the degree to which climate change has been considered in the information used to make the assessments contained within the WCS.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 vii
The capacity of the sewerage system and the water quality of receiving water bodies stand out as two elements of the assessment where the consequences of climate change are expected to be high, but no account has been made of climate impacts in the assessment. Where feasible, these should be taken into account in the additional assessment included within the Phase 2 WCS.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 viii
Contents
Executive Summary ...... iv 1 Introduction ...... 8 1.1 Terms of Reference ...... 8 1.2 The Water Cycle ...... 8 1.3 Impacts of Development on the Water Cycle ...... 9 1.4 Objectives ...... 9 1.5 Study Area ...... 10 1.6 Record of Engagement ...... 10 2 Future Growth in Bracknell Forest ...... 14 2.1 Housing ...... 14 2.2 Availability of Land for Housing ...... 15 2.3 Capacity Assessments ...... 16 2.4 Summary ...... 20 2.5 Employment ...... 20 2.6 Development Scenarios for the Water Cycle Study ...... 21 3 Legislative and Policy Framework ...... 25 3.1 National policy ...... 25 3.2 Regional Policy ...... 30 3.3 Local policy ...... 30 3.4 Environmental Policy ...... 31 3.5 Water Industry Policy ...... 34 4 Water Resources and Water Supply ...... 37 4.1 Introduction ...... 37 4.2 Availability of Water Resources...... 38 4.3 Water Resource Assessment: Water Resource Management Plans ...... 43 4.4 Water Supply Infrastructure Assessment ...... 49 5 Wastewater Collection ...... 52 5.1 Sewerage System Capacity Assessment ...... 52 6 Wastewater Treatment Flow and Water Quality ...... 58 6.1 Wastewater Treatment Works in Bracknell Forest ...... 58 6.2 Assessing Wastewater Flow and Water Quality ...... 59 6.3 Data Requirements ...... 59 6.4 Wastewater Treatment Flow Permit Assessment...... 60 6.5 Scoping Water Quality Assessment ...... 67 6.6 Wastewater Treatment Works Odour Assessment ...... 79 7 Flood Risk Management ...... 81 7.1 Assessment of Additional Flood Risk from Increased WwTW Discharges ...... 81 8 Environmental Constraints and Opportunities ...... 83 8.1 Sites with Environmental Designation ...... 83 9 Climate Change Impact Assessment ...... 87 9.1 Approach ...... 87 9.2 Results ...... 87 9.3 Recommendations ...... 88 10 Summary and Recommendations ...... 89 10.1 Water Cycle Study Summary ...... 89 10.2 Timescales for Implementing Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Upgrades ...... 92 10.3 Safeguarding of Sites ...... 92 10.4 Recommendations ...... 93 Appendices ...... I
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 1
Contents
A Appendix - Wastewater Treatment Works Permit Summary ...... I B Appendix - Sites under consideration ...... IV C Appendix - Affinity Water Supply Network Assessment ...... VI
List of Figures Figure 1-1 The Water Cycle ...... 9 Figure 2-1 Map of West of Berkshire HMA Council areas ...... 14 Figure 2-2 Sites Under Consideration for Development identified in Draft SHELAA Part 2 ...... 23 Figure 2-3 Location of Site Clusters in Bracknell Forest ...... 24 Figure 3-1: Flood Risk and the Preparation of Local Plans ...... 26 Figure 3-2 PPG: Water supply, wastewater and water quality considerations for plan making and planning applications ...... 27 Figure 4-1 Surface waters present in Bracknell Forest ...... 37 Figure 4-2 Bedrock Geology in Bracknell Forest ...... 38 Figure 4-3 ALS Regions Relevant to Bracknell Forest ...... 39 Figure 4-4 Water Supply Company Supply Boundaries ...... 43 Figure 5-1:Thames Water's Drainage Strategy framework and estimated delivery timetable ...... 54 Figure 6-1: Wastewater Treatment Works in Bracknell Forest ...... 58 Figure 6-2: Overview of typical combined sewerage system and water recycling centre discharges ...... 60 Figure 6-3 Ascot WwTW Headroom Forecast ...... 63 Figure 6-4 Bracknell WwTW headroom forecast ...... 63 Figure 6-5 Easthampstead Park WwTW headroom forecast ...... 64 Figure 6-6: Extract from Wokingham Borough Council Call for Sites Map ...... 65 Figure 6-7 Sandhurst WwTW Headroom Forecast ...... 65 Figure 6-8 Ascot WwTW Location and WFD Classification ...... 69 Figure 6-9 Bracknell WwTW Location and WFD Classification ...... 70 Figure 6-10 Easthampstead WwTW Location and WFD Classification ...... 71 Figure 6-11 Sandhurst WwTW Location and WFD Classification ...... 72 Figure 6-12 Billingbear WwTW Location and WFD Classification ...... 73 Figure 8-1 Map of environmental designations and their proximity to watercourses ...... 83
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 2
List of Tables Table 2-1: Objectively Assessed Need (OAN) by local authority ...... 15 Table 2-2: Outstanding commitments at 31st March 2016 (net) ...... 15 Table 2-3: Summary of Building Progress by Parish (Hard Commitments) ...... 16 Table 2-4: Parish Codes ...... 16 Table 2-5: Parish overview, estimated capacity by status (individual sites) ...... 17 Table 2-6: Parish overview, estimated capacity by locational principles (individual sites) . 17 Table 2-7: Parish overview, capacity by status (clusters) ...... 17 Table 2-8: Parish overview, capacity by locational principle (clusters) ...... 18 Table 2-9: Windfall analysis of small site development (less than 5units/less than 1 Ha) . 18 Table 2-10: Windfall analysis of medium site development (5-10 units/less than 1 Ha) .... 18 Table 2-11: Windfall analysis of medium site developments (10+ units/less than 1 Ha) ... 19 Table 2-12: Position on housing requirements ...... 20 Table 2-13: Planning commitments for Employment Uses at 31st March 2016 (summary) ...... 21 Table 2-14: Employment capacity identified ...... 21 Table 3-1: BREEAM credits for percentage improvement over baseline water consumption ...... 29 Table 4-1: Implications of Surface Water Resource Availability Colours ...... 40 Table 4-2: Thames Corridor ALS resource availability ...... 41 Table 4-3: Loddon ALS resource availability ...... 42 Table 4-4: Growth forecasts used by Affinity Water in WRZ6 ...... 45 Table 4-5: Household growth in WRZ based on DCLG forecasts ...... 45 Table 4-6: Options identified in WRMP for WRZ6 ...... 46 Table 4-7: South East Water population growth forecast...... 46 Table 4-8: Estimated household growth in each Local Authority ...... 47 Table 4-9: South East Water WRMP Preferred plan proposals ...... 48 Table 4-10: Water resource recommendations ...... 49 Table 4-11: Water Supply Recommendations ...... 51 Table 5-1: RAG assessment of clusters 1-6 for foul and surface water sewerage ...... 54 Table 5-2: Wastewater Collection System Assessment Actions ...... 56 Table 6-1: Data Required for the Assessment of Water Quality ...... 59 Table 6-2: WwTW Permit Conditions ...... 61 Table 6-3: Calculation of growth by WwTW, commitments and potential future growth (all sites) ...... 62 Table 6-4: Wastewater Treatment Works Flow and Quality Consent Assessment - Thames Water Assessment ...... 66 Table 6-5: Wastewater Treatment Works Flow and Quality Consent Assessment - JBA Consulting Assessment ...... 66 Table 6-6: Wastewater Treatment Works Permit Actions ...... 67 Table 6-7: Water Framework Classifications for the Bull Brook ...... 69
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 3
Table 6-8: Proposed Growth Impacting Ascot WwTW ...... 69 Table 6-9: Water Framework Classifications for the Cut (Binfield to River Thames confluence and Maidenhead Ditch) ...... 70 Table 6-10: Proposed Growth Impacting Bracknell WwTW ...... 70 Table 6-11: Water Framework Classifications for the Emm Brook...... 71 Table 6-12: Proposed Growth Impacting Easthampstead WwTW ...... 71 Table 6-13: Water Framework Classifications for the Blackwater (Hawley to Whitewater confluence at Bramshill) ...... 72 Table 6-14: Proposed Growth Impacting Sandhurst WwTW ...... 72 Table 6-15: Water Framework Classifications for the Twyford Brook and Loddon ...... 73 Table 6-16: Key Local Planning Authorities Responses ...... 75 Table 6-17: Summary of Wastewater Flow and Water Quality Assessment Questions .... 78 Table 6-18: Sites recommended for odour assessment ...... 79 Table 6-19: Summary of odour impact assessment ...... 80 Table 6-20: Wastewater Treatment Works Odour Actions ...... 80 Table 7-1: Summary of DWF increase as a percentage of Q30 and Q100 peak flow ...... 81 Table 7-2: Summary of Flood Risk Management Recommendations ...... 82 Table 8-1: Potential impact on environmentally designated sites from WwTWs ...... 84 Table 9-1: Climate Change Pressures Scoring Matrix ...... 87 Table 9-2: Scoring of Climate Change Consequences for the Water Cycle Study ...... 87 Table 9-3: Climate Change Actions ...... 88 Table 10-1: Indicative timescales for implementing water infrastructure upgrades ...... 92 Table 10-2: All recommendations ...... 93 Table A - 1: Ascot WwTW Permit Information ...... II Table A - 2: Bracknell WwTW Permit Information ...... II Table A - 3: Easthampstead WwTW Permit Information ...... II Table A - 4: Sandhurst WwTW Permit Information ...... II
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 4
Abbreviations AW…………………………Affinity Water ALS ...... Abstraction Licensing Strategy AMP ...... Asset Management Plan AMR ...... Automatic Meter Reading AONB ...... Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty AP ...... Assessment Point ASNW ...... Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland BERR ...... Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform BFC…………………...…. Bracknell Forest Council BIDS ...... Business, Industrial, Distribution and Storage BOD ...... Biochemical Oxygen Demand BREEAM ...... Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology CAMS ...... Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies CAPEX ...... Capital Expenditure CE ...... Cambridge Econometrics CED ...... Common End Date CFMP ...... Catchment Flood Management Plan CfSH ...... Code for Sustainable Homes CLP ...... Comprehensive Local Plan CSO ...... Combined Sewer Overflow DCLG ...... Department of Communities and Local Government DWF ...... Dry Weather Flow DWI ...... Drinking Water Inspectorate DYAA ...... Dry Year Annual Average DYCP ...... Dry Year Critical Period EA ...... Environment Agency EC ...... European Community ECA ...... European Communities Act EDNA ...... Economic Development Needs Assessment EFI ...... Ecological Flow Indicator EP ...... Environmental Permit EU ...... European Union FEH ...... Flood Estimation Handbook FFT ...... Flow to Full Treatment FWMA ...... Flood and Water Management Act FZ ...... Flood Zone GES ...... Good Ecological Status GIS ...... Geographic Information Systems 2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 5
HOF ...... Hands-Off Flow HOL ...... Hands-off Level IDB ...... Internal Drainage Board IDP ...... Infrastructure Delivery Plan JBA ...... Jeremy Benn Associates LLFA ...... Lead Local Flood Authority LPA ...... Local Planning Authority l/p/d ...... Litres per person per day Ml/d ...... Mega (Million) litres per day
NH4...... Ammonia NPPF ...... National Planning Policy Framework NYAA ...... Normal Year Average Annual OAN ...... Objectively Assessed Need OfWAT ...... Water Service Regulation Authority ONS ...... Office of National Statistics OPEX ...... Operational Expenditure OS ...... Ordnance Survey P ...... Phosphorous PDL ...... Previously Developed Land PE ...... Population Equivalent p/h ...... Person per house PPS ...... Planning Policy Statement RAG ...... Red / Amber / Green assessment RBD ...... River Basin District RBMP ...... River Basin Management Plan ReFH ...... Revitalised Flood Hydrograph RNAG ...... Reason for Not Achieving Good (Status) RQP ...... River Quality Planning tool RZ ...... Resource Zone SA ...... Sustainability Appraisals SAC ...... Special Area of Conservation SANGS ...... Suitable Accessible Natural Green Space SBP ...... Strategic Business Plan SEA ...... Strategic Environmental Assessment SEPA ...... Scottish Environmental Protection Agency SEW………………………South East Water SFRA ...... Strategic Flood Risk Assessment SHELAA ...... Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment SHMA ...... Strategic Housing Market Assessment SPA ...... Special Protection Area
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 6
SPD ...... Supplementary Planning Document SPZ ...... Source Protection Zone SS ...... Suspended Solids SSSI ...... Site of Special Scientific Interest SU ...... Sewerage Undertaker SuDS ...... Sustainable Drainage Systems SWMP ...... Surface Water Management Plan TCAMS ...... Thames Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy TW ...... Thames Water uFMfSW ...... Updated Flood Map for Surface Water UWWTD ...... Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive WaSC ...... Water and Sewerage Company WBC ...... Wokingham Borough Council WCS ...... Water Cycle Study WFD ...... Water Framework Directive WRC ...... Water Recycling Centre WRMP ...... Water Resource Management Plan WRZ ...... Water Resource Zone WQA ...... Water Quality Assessment WSZ ...... Water Supply Zone WTW ...... Water Treatment Works WwTW ...... Wastewater Treatment Works
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 7
1 Introduction
1.1 Terms of Reference JBA Consulting was commissioned by Bracknell Forest Council to undertake a Water Cycle Study (WCS) for Bracknell Forest to inform the Bracknell Forest Council Comprehensive Local Plan (CLP). The purpose of the Water Cycle Study (WCS) along with the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) is to form part of a comprehensive and robust evidence base for the CLP which will set out a vision and framework for development in the area up to 2036, and will be used to inform decisions on the location of future development. Unmitigated future development and climate change can adversely affect the environment and water infrastructure capability. A WCS will provide the required evidence, together with an agreed strategy, to ensure that planned growth occurs within environmental constraints, with the appropriate infrastructure in place in a timely manner so that planned allocations are deliverable.
1.2 The Water Cycle
1.2.1 What is a Water Cycle Study (WCS)? National Planning Policy Framework Practice Guidance on Water Supply, Wastewater and Water Quality1 describes a water cycle study as: "a voluntary study that helps organisations work together to plan for sustainable growth. It uses water and planning evidence and the expertise of partners to understand environmental and infrastructure capacity. It can identify joined up and cost-effective solutions, that are resilient to climate change for the lifetime of the development. The study provides evidence for Local Plans and sustainability appraisals and is ideally done at an early stage of plan-making. Local authorities (or groups of local authorities) usually lead water cycle studies, as a chief aim is to provide evidence for sound Local Plans but other partners often include the Environment Agency and water companies." The Environment Agency's guidance on WCS2 recommends a phased approach: • Phase 1: Scoping study, focussing on formation of a steering group, identifying issues for consideration and the need for an outline study. • Phase 2: Outline study, to identify environmental constraints, infrastructure constraints, a sustainability assessment and consideration of whether a detailed study is required. • Phase 3: Detailed study, to identify infrastructure requirements, when they are required, how they will be funded and implemented and an overall assessment of the sustainability of proposed infrastructure.
Figure 1-1 below shows the main elements that compromise the Water Cycle and shows how the natural and man-made processes and systems interact to collect, store or transport water in the environment.
1 Department for Communities and Local Government (2014) Planning Practice Guidance: Water supply, wastewater and water quality. Accessed online at http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/ on 19/04/2017 2 Environment Agency (2009) Water Cycle Study Guidance, accessed online at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140328084622/http://cdn.environment-agency.gov.uk/geho0109bpff-e-e.pdf on: 24/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 8 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Figure 1-1 The Water Cycle
1.3 Impacts of Development on the Water Cycle New homes require the provision of clean water, safe disposal of wastewater and protection from flooding. It is possible that allocating large numbers of new homes at some locations may result in the capacity of the existing available infrastructure being exceeded. This situation could potentially lead to service failures to water and wastewater customers, have adverse impacts on the environment or cause the high cost of upgrading water and wastewater assets being passed on to bill payers. Climate change presents further challenges such as increased intensity and frequency of rainfall and a higher frequency of drought events that can be expected to put greater pressure on the existing infrastructure.
1.4 Objectives As a WCS is not a statutory instrument, Local Planning Authorities are advised to prioritise the different stages of the WCS to integrate with their Local Plan programme. This scoping report is written as an interim report to support the development of the Comprehensive Local Plan (CLP) and to identify whether an outline / detailed WCS is required. Specific requirements, specified by the project brief, were to: • Provide a scoping report, taking into account guidance in the NPPF, NPPG, The Water Framework Directive, The Thames River Basin Management Plan and the EA Water Cycle Study Requirements and Guidance – Thames Area (September 2016); • Produce an effective water cycle study in the context of the scoping stage so that: o New development takes place only within environmental constraints; o New development occurs in the most sustainable location, in relation to the water environment; o Water cycle infrastructure is in place before new development is occupied and; o Opportunities for more sustainable infrastructure options are realised. • Include the outcomes of stakeholder engagement within the scoping study; • Gather, assess and use existing data and evidence available, in order to prepare the scoping report and address specific questions; • Determine any gaps in knowledge/evidence; • Identify any environmental and major infrastructure constraints; • Where relevant, cross reference with the replacement Strategic Flood Risk Assessment currently being prepared and its outcomes; • Identification of the issues and questions to be considered with regards to water resources and water quality; • Establish whether an outline study is required.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 9 Water Cycle Study v2-0
1.5 Study Area This WCS scoping report has been written for Bracknell Forest Council and includes the parishes of Bracknell, Ascot, Binfield, Crowthorne, Sandhurst and Winkfield. The area is located within two river catchments, the Thames and the Loddon. Water supply services for Bracknell Forest are split between Affinity Water (AW) and South East Water (SEW), and waste water services are provided by Thames Water.
1.6 Record of Engagement
1.6.1 Introduction Preparation of a water cycle study requires significant engagement with stakeholders both within the Local Planning Authority, with water and wastewater utilities, with the Environment Agency and, where there may be cross-boundary issues, with neighbouring local authorities. This section forms a record of engagement for the WCS.
1.6.2 Scoping study engagement The preparation of scoping study was supported by the following engagement: Request for water quality and wastewater treatment data, 17/02/2017
Engaged Environment Agency Parties Details Request for information relating to the assessment of Water Quality.
Inception meeting, 15/03/2017
BFC - Lead Local Flood Authority function Affinity Water (unable to attend) Engaged South East Water (unable to attend) parties Thames Water Environment Agency
Details Scope of works and data collection requirements reviewed.
Inception meeting follow-up teleconferences, 20/03/2017 and 21/03/2017
Engaged Affinity Water (20/03/2017) parties South East Water (21/03/2017) A summary of the inception meeting, including scope of works and data collection Details requirements reviewed, for those organisations unable to attend the inception meeting in person.
Request for information from water and sewerage utilities, 23/03/2017
Affinity Water Engaged South East Water parties Affinity Water
A letter was sent to each of the water and sewerage utilities, requesting the following information:
Details Water resources • WRMP annual update reports for 2015 and 2016. • GIS layer showing the boundary of Water Resource Zones.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 10 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Water supply • Request for a site-by-site assessment of network capacity and constraints. Wastewater Collection • Request for a site-by-site assessment of network capacity and constraints. Wastewater treatment • Thames Water’s headroom capacity assessment available for Ascot, Bracknell, Easthampstead and Sandhurst WwTWs. • Identify any significant known constraints which could make provision of additional treatment capacity technically difficult, more expensive and/or more time consuming at specific works, for example land constraints, odour issues due to encroachment of development etc. Water quality No actions required at this stage. Safeguarding sites • Are there any significant sites for strategic infrastructure development within Bracknell Forest which you require to be safeguarded from future development in the Local Plan? • If so, please provide site outlines.
Consultation with neighbouring local authorities in accordance with the Duty to Co-operate Requirement (April 2017) Included all neighbouring councils, as well as other councils within the Blackwater catchment: • Basingstoke and Dean Borough Council • Guildford Borough Council • Hants County Council Engaged • Hart District Council parties • Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Rushmoor Borough Council • Surrey County Council • Surrey Heath Borough Council • Thames Valley Berkshire LEP • Wokingham Borough Council Request for information on ongoing Water Cycle Studies and provision of reports and water quality models: • Hart District Council, Rushmoor Borough Council and Surrey Heath Borough Councils completed and published a joint WCS in May 2017. • Hants County Council and Wokingham Borough Council confirmed that they had no comments to make. • Guildford Borough Council confirmed that their most recent water quality modelling did use SIMCAT on the River Blackwater, and they have requested Details their consultant to supply the model for use on the Bracknell Forest WCS. • Basingstoke and Dean Borough Council's existing Water Cycle Study was completed in 2007 (stage 1) and 2009 (stage 2). There are no plans to update these in the short to medium term. Water quality of the River Loddon was discussed at length during their Local Plan examination. Reference is made to a Statement of Common Ground between the Council, EA and TWUL, and to water quality modelling having been undertaken by the EA. • No response has been received from Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, Surrey County Council or Thames Valley Berkshire LEP.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 11 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Review of draft Scoping Stage Water Cycle Study, May 2017
Affinity Water Engaged South East Water parties Thames Water Environment Agency
Invited to review draft report. Comments have been addressed in the final stage 1 Details report.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 12 Water Cycle Study v2-0
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 13 Water Cycle Study v2-0
2 Future Growth in Bracknell Forest
2.1 Housing
2.1.1 Housing Delivery The western area of Berkshire has been identified in the Berkshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA)3 as a “distinct and functioning” housing market area. The West of Berkshire Spatial Planning Framework has been produced as a result of collaborative work by the four constituent local authorities on how to meet their Objective Assessment of Housing Need: • Bracknell Forest Council • Reading Borough Council • West Berkshire Council • Wokingham Borough Council Figure 2-1 Map of West of Berkshire HMA Council areas
Between 2013 and 2036 the area needs to deliver in the region of 65,6654 new dwellings to tackle population growth, affordability, market factors, sustaining and improving economic growth and the continued growth from London. To achieve this requires just under 3,000 homes to be built every year. Table 2-1 below contains a breakdown of this number by local authority.
3 GL Hearn (2016) Berkshire (including South Bucks) Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2016), available for download at https://beta.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/comprehensive-local-plan/evidence-base on 29/08/2017. 4 Bracknell Forest Council, Reading Borough Council, West Berkshire Council, and Wokingham Borough Council (2016) West of Berkshire Spatial Planning Framework (2016) Accessed online at https://files.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/sites/bracknell/west-of-berkshire- spatial-planning-framework-final.pdf on 29/07/2017.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 14 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Table 2-1: Objectively Assessed Need (OAN) by local authority
OAN over planning period Authority OAN (Homes Per Annum) 2013 to 2036 Bracknell Forest 635 14,605 Reading 699 16,077 West Berkshire 665 15,088 Wokingham 856 19,688 Western HMA 2,855 65,665 Source: West of Berkshire Spatial Planning Framework (2016)
By way of comparison, the 2014 base household projections prepared by Department for Communities and Local Government5 estimates that the number of households in Bracknell Forest will grow, over the same plan period, by 12,082 (or 525 per annum).
2.2 Availability of Land for Housing The Bracknell Forest Final Draft Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA)6 is an important piece of evidence in preparing local plans and identifies possible sites for future housing and economic development. It also contains an assessment of development potential, suitability, likelihood and timing of development. It does not determine whether a site should be allocated; this decision remains part of the local planning process. The focus for Bracknell Forest Council was on sites outside the planning process to avoid duplication of existing data or publications, i.e. the Draft SHELAA does not include allocated sites, sites with planning permission or sites with a resolution to approve, subject to completing a Section 106 Agreement. Should sites identified in the Draft SHELAA subsequently receive planning permission they will be removed from the Draft SHELAA assessment. The Planning Commitments for Housing at March 20167 gives details of the number of dwellings currently committed – see Table 2-2 below. A detailed breakdown is contained in Table 2-3. Table 2-2: Outstanding commitments at 31st March 2016 (net)
Soft (Development identified Site Size Hard8 Soft (S.106) in an adopted Local Plan)
1 ha or over (large sites) 2680 618 3452
Under 1 ha, over 10 units 414 220 195 (medium)
Under 1 ha, under 10 units 170 26 - (small) Source: Bracknell Forest Council (2016), Planning Commitments for Housing at March 2016
5 Department for Communities and Local Government (2016) Household Projections 2014-based: Methodological Report. Accessed online at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-household-projections on 14/03/2017 6 Bracknell Forest Council (2016) Final Draft Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA): Part 2 Results (Nov 2016 v2). Accessed online at: http://consult.bracknell- forest.gov.uk/portal/planning/clp/shelaa_2016/strategic_housing_and_economic_land_availabilty_assessment_final_draft_and_site_ selection_methodology_2016 On: 29/08/2017 7 Bracknell Forest Council (2016) Planning Commitments for Housing at 2016: Accessed online at http://www.bracknell- forest.gov.uk/planning-commitments-for-housing.pdf on 14/03/2017. 8 There are two types of commitment. These are: Hard commitment - dwellings on a site which has the benefit of a valid planning permission. Soft commitment - dwellings on a site which has no formal planning permission, but which has been identified in principle as being suitable for development. Soft commitments are further divided into two categories: a site where the principle of development has been accepted through a formal resolution of the local planning authority, but where the signing of a legal agreement is awaited before planning permission is issued; and, a site which had been identified in a Local Plan (for example, Site Allocations Local Plan) but which has yet to receive planning permission. Sites identified through the Local Plan process are only included when the document has been adopted.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 15 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Table 2-3: Summary of Building Progress by Parish (Hard Commitments)
Under 1 Under 1 1 ha or ha, Soft Completions ha, 10+ over under 10 commits units
units
Parish
at 31st
Mar '16
New Build New Dem Conv Cou/ Net con. Under start Not con. Under start Not con. Under start Not - Binfield 25 17 32 103 417 46 - 1 17 1435 10 Bracknell 215 -1 12 226 3 352 317 7 19 33 969 Crowthorne 13 -2 19 30 - 1000 16 15 13 - 468 Sandhurst 3 -2 3 4 - - - - 13 14 136 Warfield 10 0 2 12 84 663 - - 12 17 1380 Winkfield 30 -1 3 32 1 57 - 13 4 27 123 - Total 296 56 336 191 2489 379 35 62 108 4511 16 Source: Bracknell Forest Council (2016), Planning Commitments for Housing at March 2016 COU = Change of Use
82 potential sites have been identified and are included in the Draft SHELAA, most of which have been submitted for housing. A consultation exercise on the draft Site Selection Methodology and the submitted Draft SHELAA sites ran from 21st November to 19th December 2016. This prompted four further sites being submitted to Bracknell Forest Council for consideration9. Where potential use or capacity estimates were not available, the WCS assumes that the site will be developed for housing at an average density of 35 units per hectare. Sites have been given the following codes designating their parish: Table 2-4: Parish Codes
Parish Code Parish Code
Binfield BIN Sandhurst SAND
Bracknell BRA Warfield WAR
Crowthorne CROW Winkfield WINK
2.3 Capacity Assessments Existing local plans are aimed at meeting needs up to 2026, and it is thought that additional land will need to be identified to provide in the region of 20,000 – 25,000 homes on sites not yet identified10. A collaborative approach between local authorities is being proposed to help deliver housing in areas which can’t meet all their needs within their own boundaries. For instance, it is unlikely that Reading Borough Council will be able to identify sufficient sites to meet its OAN within its own boundaries. At present, however, whilst Bracknell Forest Council is aiming to meet its own needs, it is not in a position to indicate whether or not it will be possible to accommodate unmet need firstly from Reading Borough and secondly from an adjoining HMA.
9 The 4 submitted sites are not included in the tables in this section, which are taken from the published Draft SHELAA documents. Expected yield (based on the draft SHEELA Methodology) and location of these submitted sites: 2 in Winkfield with a yield of approximate 40 dwellings and 2 in Warfield with a yield of approximate 257 dwellings, totalling an extra 297 dwellings. Further additional sites were submitted to the Council for consideration but this was after the Water Cycle Study had commenced preparation and are therefore not referenced in this scoping study. 10 West of Berkshire Spatial Planning Framework (2016) http://www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/west-of-berkshire-spatial-planning- framework-final.pdf
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 16 Water Cycle Study v2-0
2.3.1 Capacity in Individual Sites The Draft SHELAA assessment of sites in relation to Use Class C3 indicates a potential total capacity of 8,812 dwellings. Some of these have applications pending decisions or appeals. If approved these will be omitted from the Draft SHELAA as they will be within the planning system. Table 2-5 and Table 2-6 give a summary of the capacity broken down by location and Previously Developed Land (PDL) / Greenfield. Table 2-5: Parish overview, estimated capacity by status (individual sites)
Parish PDL Greenfield Total Binfield 35 1,133 1,168 Bracknell 487 1,181 1,668 Crowthorne 6 - 6 Sandhurst - 751 751 Warfield 28 2,480 2,508 Winkfield 71 2,640 2,711 Total 627 8,185 8, 812 Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016) Table 2-6: Parish overview, estimated capacity by locational principles (individual sites)
Green Parish Settlement Countryside Total Belt Binfield - 1,168 - 1,168 Bracknell 487 1,181 1,668 Crowthorne 6 - - 6 Sandhurst - 751 - 751 Warfield 23 1,280 1,205 2,508 Winkfield 7 2,017 687 2,711 Total 523 6,397 1,892 8,812 Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016)
Most sites assessed are greenfield (93%), and 73% are within the countryside. An assessment of Use Class C2 (Residential Institutions) identified a capacity of 240 bed-spaces. Two of these sites (120 bed-spaces) are an alternative to Use Class C3 (equivalent to 42 units).
2.3.2 Capacity in Clustered Sites A number of the submitted sites are located adjacent to one another, forming six “clusters”. Once the identified sites are combined as clusters, the capacity for Use Class C3 increases by 202 units. Table 2-7: Parish overview, capacity by status (clusters)
Parish PDL Greenfield Total Binfield 35 1,167 1,202 Bracknell 487 1,325 1,812 Crowthorne 6 - 6 Sandhurst - 751 751 Warfield - 2,558 2,558 Winkfield 12 2,673 2,685 Total 540 8,474 9,014 Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016)
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 17 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Table 2-8: Parish overview, capacity by locational principle (clusters)
Parish Settlement Countryside Green Belt Total Binfield - 1,202 - 1,202 Bracknell 487 1,325 1,812 Crowthorne 6 - - 6 Sandhurst - 751 - 751 Warfield 23 1,330 1,205 2,558 Winkfield - 1,998 687 2,685 Total 516 6,606 1,892 9, 014 Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016)
2.3.3 Windfall Capacity Windfall sites are those sites that are not specifically identified in the local plan. The Draft SHELAA does not include sites with a capacity of less than 5 dwellings. Furthermore, larger sites may become available for development unexpectedly. An analysis of historic data was carried out to establish the likely contribution to capacity from these developments. In-fill in residential gardens was excluded from the analysis. Table 2-9: Windfall analysis of small site development (less than 5units/less than 1 Ha)
Net completions Total net completions Period Total net completions involving in-fill on excluding residential residential gardens garden in-fill 2006-07 25 9 16 2007-08 10 5 5 2008-09 6 3 3 2009-10 3 - 3 2010-11 26 13 13 2011-12 15 7 8 2012-13 27 4 23 2013-14 12 7 5 2014-15 30 3 27 2015-16 31 6 25 Total 185 57 128 Average over 18.5 5.7 12.8 10 years Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016)
Table 2-10: Windfall analysis of medium site development (5-10 units/less than 1 Ha)
Total net Net completions Total net completions Period involving in-fill on completions excluding residential residential gardens garden in-fill 2006-07 14 5 9 2007-08 25 - 25 2008-09 7 - 7 2009-10 5 - 5 2010-11 15 - 15 2011-12 5 - 5 2012-13 5 -2 7
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 18 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Total net Net completions Total net completions Period involving in-fill on completions excluding residential residential gardens garden in-fill 2013-14 -16 7 -23 2014-15 22 6 16 2015-16 49 6 43 Total 131 22 109 Average over 10 13.1 2.2 10.9 years Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016)
Table 2-11: Windfall analysis of medium site developments (10+ units/less than 1 Ha)
Net completions Total net completions Period Total net completions involving in-fill on excluding residential residential gardens garden in-fill 2006-07 159 121 38 2007-08 54 33 21 2008-09 95 27 68 2009-10 12 12 - 2010-11 42 42 - 2011-12 9 11 -2 2012-13 100 18 82 2013-14 16 - 16 2014-15 74 - 74 2015-16 15 -8 23 Total 576 256 320 Average over 56.6 25.6 32 10 years Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016)
Based on the three tables above, an allowance of 56 units per year has been assumed in future land supply calculations11.
11 Bracknell Forest Council (2016) Final Draft Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA): Part 2 Results (November 2016 v2)
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 19 Water Cycle Study v2-0
2.4 Summary Over the new plan period 2013-2036 Bracknell Forest will need to accommodate 14,605 new homes (based on an objective assessment of housing need of 635 dwellings per annum12). The following table shows (as at 31 March 2016), what has already been achieved, and what still needs to be planned for in relation to housing (C3 use): Table 2-12: Position on housing requirements
Achieved by 31 March 2016 1,026 Homes completed between 2013/14 and 2015/16 Homes with planning permission (large and medium sites) Plus 3,134 (excludes windfall allowance) Large and medium sites already allocated, but without Plus 4,485 permission (3,647) and homes subject to legal agreements (838) Small and medium windfall allowance for remaining part of Plus 1,120 the plan period 2016/17 to 2035/36 (56 units x 20 years) = 9,765 Still required for the period 2013-2036 Requirement over total plan period 2013/14 to 2035/36 14,605 using objective assessment of housing need (635 x 23) In summary How many new homes needed for the 14,605 period 2013 to 2036 How many homes BFC have already found sites for (including windfall 9,765 allowance) Amount outstanding assuming all the = 4,840 above come forward (minimum figure) Source: Bracknell Forest Council Note that sites BIN8, BIN13 and SAND5 fall partially within Wokingham Borough.
2.5 Employment Additional land will also be required to provide new employment in Bracknell Forest. According to the SHMA, annual employment growth in Bracknell Forest is expected to be 0.4%13, giving a total increase in employment of 7,400 by 2036. This is based on an examination of the Cambridge Econometrics (CE) forecast in employment growth over the planning period, with various adjustments made based on historic performance which give a lower level of growth than is forecast from the CE analysis. The Central Berkshire Economic Development Needs Assessment (EDNA)14 presents three scenarios for employment growth based on baseline labour demand (from the CE forecasts), past completion rates (a significantly negative forecast for employment floorspace), and future labour supply based on a housing led approach (SHMA). The two scenarios that predict positive growth, forecast an increase of between 9,770 (page 51) and 15,390 (page 43) new jobs in the Bracknell Forest area.
12 Objective Assessment of Housing Need contained in the Berkshire (including South Bucks) Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), February 2016: http://consult.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/file/3976882 13 Berkshire (including South Bucks) Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2016) P194-195 http://info.westberks.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=40949&p=0 14 Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (2016), Central Berkshire FEMA Economic Development Needs Assessment http://consult.bracknell- forest.gov.uk/file/4252028
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 20 Water Cycle Study v2-0
2.5.1 Employment Capacity Planning commitments for Employment Uses15 at 31st March 2016 shows that there was a net loss in floor space of 31,677 m2 for business, industrial, distribution and storage (BIDS) in the year leading up to March 2016 as a result of completions. New permissions granted resulted in a loss of 3,955 m2, outstanding hard commitments were 3,052 m2. Table 2-13: Planning commitments for Employment Uses at 31st March 2016 (summary)
New Outstanding at 31st March 2016 Completions 1st permissions 1st Land April- 31st March April- 31st Type 2016 (m2) March 2016 Hard Soft (m2) Greenfield 176 176 37,571 0 Brownfield -31,853 -4,131 -34,519 -14,263 Total -31,677 -3,955 3,052 -14,263 Source: Bracknell Forest Planning Commitments for Employment Uses at 31st March 2016
The Draft SHELAA estimates a capacity of 20,329 m2 of employment use floor space from suggested sites, although 18,100 m2 of this is as an alternative to Use Class C3 (equivalent to 89 units). Table 2-14: Employment capacity identified
Usage Area (m2) Development Ref.
A1-A3, A5 1,284 CROW1 and BRA916
D1 465 BIN10
12,980 (480 and 12,500 of B8 which is an alternative to C3 BIN14 and WINK6 use)
B1/B8 5,600 (alternative to C3 use) BIN4
Source: Bracknell Forest Draft SHELAA Part 2: Results (2016)
2.6 Development Scenarios for the Water Cycle Study
2.6.1 Principles The assessments of the impacts of growth on the water environment and water and wastewater infrastructure were based on the following principles: • Existing completions and commitments should have already been known about by the water and wastewater providers through engagement with the planning system and through developer engagement, however the impact on future services and the environment were based on a combination of existing commitments and new allocations. Therefore, the WCS has focussed on potential future allocations, but also takes into account existing completions and commitments, for example where assessing the future volumetric capacity and environmental capacity at a wastewater treatment works. • The EDNA scenarios for employment growth in Bracknell Forest present a wide range of possible scenarios based on different calculation methods. Recent completions and commitments indicate a trend towards change of use from employment to residential, and a net reduction in - employment floorspace.
15 Bracknell Forest Council (2017) Planning Commitments for Employment Uses at 31st March 2016 Version 3 - Republished July 2017. Accessed online at https://files.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/sites/bracknell/documents/planning-commitments-for-employment-uses- at-march-2016.pdf?SUheo_cqSZUaC9Mgr4nqcepGmOX.8rEA on 29/08/2017. 16 Sites CROW1 and BRA9 were granted planning permission during preparation of this scoping report. They are included within the assessments in this report, using the employment area yield figures from the Draft SHELAA, which may differ from the granted planning permission.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 21 Water Cycle Study v2-0
• In most cases, residential use puts a higher demand per hectare of developed land on water and wastewater services than employment use, the exception being where high water using employment is being planned. Where the likely future use was known to be housing or employment, a suitable water demand was calculated for that use. Where the likely use of the site was unknown, or where the site was likely to be for mixed use development but the split between housing an employment was unknown, the water demand for development sites was based on residential usage. On mixed-use sites this tends to give an overall conservative assessment of demand.
2.6.2 The Importance of Scale The Water Cycle Study requires development data at three spatial scales: 1. Water Resource Zone scale The assessment of water resource capacity will be prepared at the Water Resource Zone (WRZ) scale. Growth forecasts for Bracknell Forest will be based on Department for Communities and Local Government household growth forecasts (DCLG). This will be assigned to Water Resource Zones using the approximate split between zones of the Draft SHELAA sites. Estimates of growth from neighbouring authorities within the same Water Resource Zone will also be obtained from the DCLG household growth forecasts. Neighbouring authorities will be informed of the WCS scoping study and asked for confirmation of their growth plans, in accordance with the Council’s Duty to Co- operate Framework. 2. Settlement / Wastewater catchment scale Affinity Water and South East Water will be asked to assess the capacity of their water supply networks at a settlement scale. Forecasts of growth by settlement will be developed using the overall OAN target of 14,605, disaggregated between settlements using approximate proportions from the distribution of Draft SHELAA sites. Thames Water will be asked to assess treatment capacity at the four Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTWs) (excluding Billingsbear) serving Bracknell Forest. Growth forecasts for each catchment will be proportioned by the OAN target by wastewater catchment using the distribution of sites in the Draft SHELAA. 3. Site scale The assessment of the impact of growth on sewerage systems needs to be carried out on individual sites or clusters of sites. Mapping showing the distribution of Draft SHELAA sites will be provided to Thames Water to assist their assessments.
2.6.3 Collation of development sites for further study In order to allow the analysis required later in the study, the development sites identified were added to an Excel spreadsheet, with additional information about their proposed use, area and capacity. This is attached in Appendix B.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 22 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Figure 2-2 Sites Under Consideration for Development identified in Draft SHELAA Part 2
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 23 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Figure 2-3 Location of Site Clusters in Bracknell Forest
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 24 Water Cycle Study v2-0
. 3 Legislative and Policy Framework The following sections introduce several national, regional and local policies that must be considered by the LPAs, water companies and developers during the planning stage. Key extracts from these policies relating to water consumption targets and mitigating the impacts on the water environment from the new development, are summarised below.
3.1 National policy
3.1.1 National Planning Policy Framework The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)17 was published on 27th March 2012, as part of reforms to make the planning system less complex and more accessible, to protect the environment and to promote sustainable growth. The NPPF provides guidance to planning authorities to take account of flood risk and water and wastewater infrastructure delivery in their Local Plans. Paragraph 94:
“Local planning authorities should adopt proactive strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change, taking full account of flood risk, coastal change and water supply and demand considerations”
Paragraph 99:
“Local Plans should take account of climate change over the longer term, including factors such as flood risk, coastal change, water supply and changes to biodiversity and landscape. New development should be planned to avoid increased vulnerability to the range of impacts arising from climate change. When new development is brought forward in areas which are vulnerable, care should be taken to ensure that risks can be managed through suitable adaptation measures, including through the planning of green infrastructure.”
Paragraph 100 states:
“Local Plans should be supported by a strategic flood risk assessment and develop policies to manage flood risk from all sources, taking account of advice from the Environment Agency and other relevant flood risk management bodies, such as Lead Local Flood Authorities and Internal Drainage Boards. Local Plans should apply a sequential, risk-based approach to the location of development to avoid, where possible, flood risk to people and property and manage any residual risk, taking account of the impacts of climate change”.
Paragraph 156 states
“Local planning authorities should set out the strategic priorities for the area in the Local Plan. This should include strategic policies to deliver...the provision of infrastructure for transport, telecommunications, waste management, water supply, wastewater, flood risk and coastal changes management, and the provision of minerals and energy”.
In March 2014, the Planning Practice Guidance was issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government, with the intention of providing guidance on the application of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in England. Of relevance to this study; • Flood Risk and Coastal Change18 • Water Supply, Wastewater and Water Quality19.
17 Department for Communities and Local Government (2012) National Planning Policy Framework 18 Department for Communities and Local Government (2014) Planning Practice Guidance: Flood Risk and Coastal Change (2014). Accessed online at http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/flood-risk-and-coastal-change/ on 19/04/2017. 19 Department for Communities and Local Government (2014) Planning Practice Guidance: Water supply, wastewater and water quality. Accessed online at http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/ on 19/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 25 Water Cycle Study v2-0
• Housing - Optional Technical Standards20.
3.1.2 Planning Practice Guidance: Flood Risk and Coastal Change Diagram 1 in the Planning Practice Guidance sets out how flood risk should be considered in the preparation of Local Plans (see Figure 3-1). These requirements are addressed principally in the Council's new 2017 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA). Figure 3-1: Flood Risk and the Preparation of Local Plans
LPA undertakes a Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (Can be undertaken individually or jointly with other authorities or partners)
Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment is used by the LPA to:
a) Inform the scope of the Sustainability Appraisal for consultation b) Identify where development can be located in areas with a low probability of flooding
The LPA assesses alternative development options using the Sustainability Appraisal, considering flood risk (including potential impact of development on surface water run-off) and other planning objectives.
YES Can sustainable development be achieved through new development located entirely within areas with a low probability of flooding?
NO
Use the SFRA to apply the Sequential Test and identify appropriate allocation sites and development. If the Exception Test needs to be applied, consider the need for a Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment
Assess alternative development options using the Sustainability Appraisal, balancing flood risk against other planning objectives.
Use the Sustainability Appraisal to inform the allocation of land in accordance with the Sequential Test. Include a policy on flood risk considerations and guidance for each site allocation. Where appropriate, allocate land to be used for flood risk management purposes.
Include the results of the Sequential Test (and Exception Test, where appropriate) in the Sustainability Appraisal Report. Use flood risk indicators and Core Output Indicators to measure the Plan’s success.
Based on Diagram 1 of NPPF Planning Practice Guidance: Flood Risk and Coastal Change (paragraph 004, Reference ID: 7-021-20140306) March 2014
20 Department for Communities and Local Government (2014) Planning Practice Guidance: Housing - Optional Technical Standards Accessed online at http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/ on 19/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 26 Water Cycle Study v2-0
3.1.3 Planning Practice Guidance: Water Supply, Wastewater and Water Quality A summary of the specific guidance on how infrastructure, water supply, wastewater and water quality considerations should be accounted for in both plan-making and planning applications is summarised below in Figure 3-2.
Figure 3-2 PPG: Water supply, wastewater and water quality considerations for plan making and planning applications
Plan-making Planning applications
Identification of suitable sites for new or
Infrastructure enhanced infrastructure. Wastewater considerations include: Consider whether new development is First presumption is to provide a system of foul appropriate near to water and drainage discharging into a public sewer. wastewater infrastructure. Phasing of development and infrastructure. Phasing new development so that water Circumstances where package sewage
and wastewater infrastructure will be in treatment plants or septic tanks are applicable. place when needed.
Water supply Water Planning for the necessary water supply would normally be addressed through the Local Plan, exceptions might include: Not Specified Large developments not identified in Local Plans; Where a Local Plan requires enhanced water efficiency in new developments.
How to help protect and enhance local surface water and groundwater in ways Water quality is only likely to be a significant
Water quality Water that allow new development to proceed planning concern when a proposal would: and avoids costly assessment at the Involve physical modifications to a water body; planning application stage. Indirectly affect water bodies, for example as a The type or location of new result of new development such as the development where an assessment of redevelopment of land that may be affected by the potential impacts on water bodies contamination etc. or through a lack of may be required. adequate infrastructure to deal with Expectations relating to sustainable wastewater. drainage systems.
Wastewater The sufficiency and capacity of If there are concerns arising from a planning wastewater infrastructure. application about the capacity of wastewater infrastructure, applicants will be asked to The circumstances where wastewater provide information about how the proposed from new development would not be development will be drained and wastewater expected to drain to a public sewer. dealt with.
boundary boundary
concerns
Cross Water supply and water quality concerns often cross local authority No specific guidance (relevant to some boundaries and can be best considered developments). - on a catchment basis. Recommends
liaison from the outset.
Water supply and quality are Sustainability considerations in strategic
SEA and and SEA environmental assessment and sustainability appraisal ... sustainability appraisal objectives could include No specific guidance (should be considered in preventing deterioration of current water applications). body status, taking climate change into
account and seeking opportunities to improve water bodies.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 27 Water Cycle Study v2-0
3.1.4 Planning Practice Guidance: Housing - Optional Technical Standards This guidance, advises planning authorities on how to gather evidence to set optional requirements, including for water efficiency. It states that “all new homes already have to meet the mandatory national standard set out in the Building Regulations (of 125 litres/person/day). Where there is a clear local need, local planning authorities can set out Local Plan policies requiring new dwellings to meet the tighter Building Regulations optional requirement of 110 litres/person/day. Planning authorities are advised to consult with the EA and water companies to determine where there is a clear local need, and also to consider the impact of setting this optional standard on housing viability. A 2014 study21 into the cost of implementing sustainability measures in housing found that meeting a standard of 110 litres per person per day would cost only £9 for a four-bedroom house.
3.1.5 Building Regulations and Code for Sustainable Homes The Building Regulations (2010) Part G22 was amended in early 2015 to require that all new dwellings must ensure that the potential water consumption must not exceed 125 litres/person/day, or 110 litres/person/day where required under planning conditions. The Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH) was, from 2007 to March 2015, the Government’s optional national standard for new housing. It became effective in England in April 2007 and a Code rating for new homes became mandatory in May 2008. The Code included six levels of water efficiency for new homes seeking to simplify the various building codes that house builders have to adhere to, the Government withdrew CfSH in March 2015, with the exception of legacy cases: "where residential developments are legally contracted to apply a code policy (e.g. affordable housing funded through the National Affordable Housing Programme 2015 to 2018, or earlier programme), or where planning permission has been granted subject to a condition stipulating discharge of a code level, and developers are not appealing the condition or seeking to have it removed or varied".
3.1.6 BREEAM - BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology) is an internationally recognised method of assessing, rating and certifying the sustainability of buildings. BREEAM can be used to assess the environmental performance of any type of building: new and existing. Standard BREEAM schemes exist for assessment of common domestic and non-domestic building types and less common building types can be assessed by developing bespoke criteria. Using independent, licensed assessors, BREEAM assesses criteria covering a range of issues in categories that evaluate energy and water use, health and wellbeing, pollution, transport, materials, waste, ecology and management processes. Buildings are rated and certified on a scale of ‘Pass’, ‘Good’, ‘Very Good’, ‘Excellent’ and ‘Outstanding’. BREEAM has expanded from its original focus on individual new buildings at the construction stage to encompass the whole life cycle of buildings from planning to in-use and refurbishment. The standard is regularly revised to improve sustainability, respond to industry feedback and support sustainability strategies and commitments. BREEAM standard can be applied to virtually any building and location, with versions for new buildings, existing buildings, refurbishment projects and large developments. BFC has the opportunity to seek BREEAM for all new, residential and non- residential buildings. It currently seeks BREEAM “Very Good” or “Excellent” through the 2008 Core Strategy23 and Sustainable Resources Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)24. Whilst BREEAM contains the flexibility to achieve this in a number of ways, a “Very Good” rating for water resources would
21 Department for Communities and Local Government (2014) Housing Standards Review: Cost Impacts. Accessed online at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/353387/021c_Cost_Report_11th_Sept_2014_FINAL.p df on 19/04/2017. 22 HM Government (2016) The Building Regulations (2010) Part G - Sanitation, hot water safety and water efficiency. 2015 edition with 2016 amendments. Accessed online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/504207/BR_PDF_AD_G_2015_with_2016_amendmen ts.pdf on 19/04/2017. 23 Bracknell Forest Borough (2008) Core Strategy Development Plan Document. Accessed online at https://files.bracknell- forest.gov.uk/sites/bracknell/documents/core-strategy-development-plan-document-february- 2008.pdf?VFRGJCxYpTXfaic4AGfcPbKtbocGA8KY on 29/08/2017. 24 Bracknell Forest Borough (2008) Sustainable Resource Management Supplementary Planning Document. Accessed online at https://files.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/sites/bracknell/documents/sustainable-resource-management-supplementary-planning- document.pdf?S5_KHKWIS5aIsspMAoiszL5FvlKnKpHl on 29/08/2017.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 28 Water Cycle Study v2-0
typically relate to a 40% improvement over baseline building water consumption25. As a minimum, a 12.5% improvement must be demonstrated to obtain BREEAM status. Guidance is provided on how to calculate this. Table 3-1 shows the BREEAM credits available for percentage improvement over baseline building water consumption in precipitation zone 1, which covers the whole of the UK. Table 3-1: BREEAM credits for percentage improvement over baseline water consumption BREEAM Percentage Credits improvement over baseline water consumption 1 12.5% 2 25% 3 40% 4 50% 5 55% Exemplary 65%
3.1.7 Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) From April 2015, Local Planning Authorities (LPA) have been given the responsibility for ensuring through the planning system that sustainable drainage is implemented on developments of 10 or more homes or other forms of major development. Under the new arrangements, the key policy and standards relating to the application of SuDS to new developments are: • The National Planning Policy Framework, which requires that development in areas already at risk of flooding should give priority to sustainable drainage systems. • The House of Commons written statement26 setting out governments intentions that LPAs should “ensure that sustainable drainage systems for the management of run-off are put in place, unless demonstrated to be inappropriate” and “clear arrangements in place for ongoing maintenance over the lifetime of the development.” In practice, this has been implemented by making Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs) statutory consultees on the drainage arrangements of major developments. • The Defra Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable drainage systems27. These set out the government’s high level requirements for managing peak flows and runoff volumes, flood risk from drainage systems and the structural integrity and construction of SuDS. This very short document is not a design manual and makes no reference to the other benefits of SuDS, for example water quality, habitat and amenity. • Bracknell Forest Council are both the LLFA and the LPA, and play a key role in ensuring that the proposed drainage schemes for all new developments comply with technical standards and policies in relation to SuDS. • An updated version of the CIRIA SuDS Manual28 was published in 2015. The guidance covers the planning, design, construction and maintenance of SuDS for effective implementation within both new and existing developments. The guidance is relevant for a range of roles with the level of technical detail increasing throughout the manual. The guidance does not include detailed information on planning requirements, SuDS approval and adoption processes and standards, as these vary by region and should be checked early in the planning process. • Thames Water do not currently have a SuDS adoption manual. In its Addendum to Sewers for Adoption 7th Edition29 TW states that it "will not adopt geocellular structures, balancing ponds or swales of any type. Where such features are incorporated as part of a drainage
25 BREEAM (2016) BREEAM International New Construction 2016: Technical Manual SD233 2.0. Accessed online at http://www.breeam.com/new-construction on 29/08/2017. 26 Sustainable drainage systems: Written statement - HCWS161. Accessed online at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2014-12- 18/HCWS161/ on 19/04/2017. 27 Defra (2015) Sustainable Drainage Systems: Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable drainage systems 28 CIRIA (2015) The SuDS Manual (C753) 29 Thames Water (2015) Addendum to Sewers for Adoption 7th Edition July 2015. Accessed online at: http://sfa.wrcplc.co.uk/Data/Sites/4/media/GalleryImages/WebImages/pdfs/TW%20Addendum%20to%20Sewers%20for%20Adoption %207th%20Edition%20June%20%202016_030117.pdf On: 19-04-2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 29 Water Cycle Study v2-0
design for a site, the developer should arrange for the Local Authority, the SuDS Adopting body or a properly constituted company to maintain them." SuDS features not adopted by BFC or Thames Water need to be maintained by householders (in the case of SuDS on private land) and by management companies for other SuDS on public open spaces and highways.
3.2 Regional Policy
3.2.1 Catchment Flood Management Plans Catchment Flood Management Plans (CFMP) are high level policy documents covering large river basin catchments. They aim to set policies for sustainable flood risk management for the whole catchment covering the next 50 to 100 years. Bracknell Forest is covered by the Thames CFMP30. This sets out ways of reducing the flood risk across the catchment.
3.2.2 Surface Water Management Plans (SWMPs) SWMPs outline the preferred surface water management strategy in a given location and establish a long-term action plan to manage surface water. There is not currently a SWMP plan for Bracknell Forest.
3.2.3 Water Resource Management Plans Water Resource Management Plans (WRMPs) are strategies that water companies are required to prepare 25-year forward looking WRMPs, with updates prepared every five years. In reality, water companies prepare regular internal updates more regularly. WRMPs are required to assess: • Future demand (due to population and economic growth) • Future water availability (including the impact of Sustainability Reductions) • Demand management and supply-side measures (e.g. water efficiency and leakage reduction, water transfers and new resource development) • How the company will address changes to abstraction licenses? • How the impacts of climate change will be mitigated? Where necessary, set out the requirements for developing additional water resources to meet growing demand. The Affinity Water and South East Water WRMP's describe how each company will manage the balance between water supply and demand over the period from 2015-2040: • Using cost-effective demand management, transfer, trading and resource development schemes to meet growth in demand from new development and to restore abstraction to sustainable levels. • In the medium to long term, ensuring that sufficient water continues to be available for growth and that the supply systems are flexible enough to adapt to climate change.
3.3 Local policy
3.3.1 Localism Act The Localism Act (2011) changes the powers of local government, it re-distributes the balance of decision making from central government back to councils, communities and individuals. In relation to the planning of sustainable development, provision 110 of the Act places a duty to cooperate on Local Authorities. This duty requires Local Authorities to “engage constructively, actively and on an ongoing basis in any process by means of which development plan documents are prepared so far as relating to a strategic matter”31. The Localism Act also provides new rights to allow local communities to come together and shape the development and growth of their area by preparing Neighbourhood Development Plans, or Neighbourhood Development Orders, where the ambition of the neighbourhood is aligned with strategic needs and priorities for the area. This means that local people can decide where new
30. Environment Agency (December 2009) Thames Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary Report. Accessed online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/thames-catchment-flood-management-plan on 19/04/17 31 Localism Act 2011: Section 110. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/section/110
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 30 Water Cycle Study v2-0
homes and businesses should go and also what they should look like. As neighbourhoods draw up their proposals, Local Planning Authorities are required to provide technical advice and support.
3.3.2 Local Plan and Local Strategy Bracknell Forest Council are currently working on a Comprehensive Local Plan (CLP). This will include the overall strategy for Bracknell Forest, site allocations and development management policies. The Issues and Options stage of the CLP was published in June 2016, and the preferred option stage is likely to be published in 2018. The Phase 1 Water Cycle Study will inform housing allocations in the Comprehensive Local Plan.
3.3.3 Infrastructure Delivery Plan The purpose of an Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) is to evaluate various services to determine if there is sufficient infrastructure to support the future levels of housing and employment in the area. The IDP presents sources of funding to assist in the delivery of infrastructure to help upgrade facilities, promote economic growth to ultimately increase the quality of life. The plan aims to sustainably develop towns and districts whilst maintaining a high-quality environment. The provision of infrastructure to support new housing in Bracknell Forest is essential, this includes roads, schools, water and sewerage provision. The implications of this will lead to the need to produce an updated IDP.
3.4 Environmental Policy
3.4.1 Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) The UWWTD is an EU Directive that concerns the collection, treatment and discharge of urban wastewater and the treatment and discharge of waste water from certain industrial sectors. The objective of the Directive is to protect the environment from the adverse effects of the above- mentioned wastewater discharges. More specifically Annex II A(a) sets out the requirements for discharges from urban wastewater treatment plants to sensitive areas which are subject to eutrophication. One or both parameters may be applied depending on the local situation. The values for concentration or for the percentage reduction shall apply. For specific information regarding concentration limits please refer to the UWWTD32. The Directive has been transposed into UK legislation through enactment of the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994 and 'The Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) (Amendments) Regulations 2003'.
3.4.2 Habitats Directive The EU Habitats Directive aims to protect the wild plants, animals and habitats that make up our diverse natural environment. The directive created a network of protected areas around the European Union of national and international importance called Natura 2000 sites. These include: • Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) - these support rare, endangered or vulnerable natural habitats, plants and animals (other than birds). • Special Protection Areas (SPAs) - support significant numbers of wild birds and habitats. Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation are established under the EC Birds Directive and Habitats Directive respectively. The directive also protects over 1,000 animals and plant species and over 200 so called "habitat types" (e.g. special types of forests, meadows, wetlands, etc.), which are of European importance.
3.4.3 The Water Framework Directive The Water Framework Directive (WFD) was first published in December 2000 and transposed into English and Welsh law in December 2003. It introduced a more rigorous concept of what "good status" should mean than the previous environmental quality measures. The WFD estimated that 95% of water bodies were at risk of failing to meet “good status”. River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) are required under the WFD and are strategies. Bracknell Forest falls into the Thames River Basin District (RBD)33. Under the WFD the RBMPs, which were
32 UWWTD. Accessed online at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:31991L0271 on 19/04/2017. 33 Thames river basin district river basin management plan: 2015 Accessed at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/thames- river-basin-district-river-basin-management-plan on: 19/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 31 Water Cycle Study v2-0
originally published in December 2009 were reviewed and updated in December 2015. A primary WFD objective is to ensure 'no deterioration' in environmental status, therefore all water bodies must meet the class limits for their status class as declared in the Final Thames River Basin Management Plan. Another equally important objective requires all water bodies to achieve good ecological status. Future development needs to be planned carefully so that it helps towards achieving the WFD and does not result in further pressure on the water environment and compromise WFD objectives. The WFD objectives as outlined in the updated RBMPs are summarised below: • "To prevent deterioration of the status of surface waters and groundwater • to achieve objectives and standards for protected areas • to aim to achieve good status for all water bodies or, for heavily modified water bodies and artificial water bodies, good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status • to reverse any significant and sustained upward trends in pollutant concentrations in groundwater • the cessation of discharges/emissions of priority hazardous substances into surface waters • progressively reduce the pollution of groundwater and prevent or limit the entry of pollutants." Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) must have regard to the Water Framework Directive as implemented in the Environment Agency’s River Basin Management Plans.
3.4.4 Protected Area Objectives The WFD specifies that areas requiring special protection under other EC Directives, and waters used for the abstraction of drinking water, are identified as protected areas. These areas have their own objectives and standards. Article 4 of the WFD required Member States to achieve compliance with the standards and objectives set for each protected area by 22 December 2015, unless otherwise specified in the Community legislation under which the protected area was established. Some areas may require special protection under more than one EC Directive or may have additional (surface water and/or groundwater) objectives. In these cases, all the objectives and standards must be met. The types of protected areas are: • Areas designated for the abstraction of water for human consumption (Drinking Water Protected Areas); • Areas designated for the protection of economically significant aquatic species (Freshwater Fish and Shellfish); • Bodies of water designated as recreational waters, including Bathing Waters; • Nutrient-sensitive areas, including areas identified as Nitrate Vulnerable Zones under the Nitrates Directive or areas designated as sensitive under Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD); and • Areas designated for the protection of habitats or species where the maintenance or improvement of the status of water is an important factor in their protection including relevant Natura 2000 sites. Many WFD protected areas coincide with water bodies; these areas will need to achieve the water body status objectives in addition to the protected area objectives. Where water body boundaries overlap with protected areas the most stringent objective applies; that is the requirements of one EC Directive should not undermine the requirements of another. The objectives for Protected Areas relevant to this study are as follows:
Drinking Water Protected Areas • Ensure that, under the water treatment regime applied, the drinking water produced meets the requirements of the Drinking Water Directive plus any UK requirements to make sure that drinking water is safe to drink; and • Ensure the necessary protection to prevent deterioration in the water quality in the protected area in order to reduce the level of purification treatment required.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 32 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Economically Significant Species (Freshwater Fish Waters) • To protect or improve the quality of running or standing freshwater to enable them to support fish belonging to Indigenous species offering a natural diversity; or species, the presence of which is judged desirable for water management purposes by the competent authorities of the Member States.
Nutrient Sensitive Areas (Nitrate Vulnerable Zones) • Reduce water pollution caused or induced by nitrates from agricultural sources; and • prevent further such pollution.
Nutrient Sensitive Areas (Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive) • To protect the environment from the adverse effects of urban waste water discharges and waste water discharges from certain industrial sectors.
Natura 2000 Protected Areas (water dependent SACs and SPAs) The objective for Natura 2000 Protected Areas identified in relation to relevant areas designated under the Habitats Directive or Birds Directive is to: Protect and, where necessary, improve the status of the water environment to the extent necessary to achieve the conservation objectives that have been established for the protection or improvement of the site's natural habitat types and species of importance.
3.4.5 Groundwater Source Protection Zones The Environment Agency has a Groundwater Protection Policy to help prevent groundwater pollution. In conjunction with this the Environment Agency have defined groundwater Source Protection Zones (SPZs) to help identify high risk areas and implement pollution prevention measures. The SPZs show the risk of contamination from activities that may cause pollution in the area, the closer the activity, the greater the risk. There are three main zones (inner, outer and total catchment) and a fourth zone of special interest which is occasionally applied.
Zone 1 (Inner protection zone) This zone is designed to protect against the transmission of toxic chemicals and water-borne disease. It indicates the area in which pollution can travel to the borehole within 50 days from any point within the zone and applies at and below the water table. There is also a minimum 50 metre protection radius around the borehole.
Zone 2 (Outer protection zone) This zone indicates the area in which pollution takes up to 400 days to travel to the borehole, or 25% of the total catchment area, whichever area is the largest. This is the minimum length of time the Environment Agency think pollutants need to become diluted or reduce in strength by the time they reach the borehole.
Zone 3 (Total catchment) This is the total area needed to support removal of water from the borehole, and to support any discharge from the borehole.
Zone of special interest This is defined on occasions, usually where local conditions mean that industrial sites and other polluters could affect the groundwater source even though they are outside the normal catchment. The Environment Agency's approach to Groundwater protection34 sets out a series of position statements that detail how the Environment Agency delivers government policy on groundwater and protects the resources from contamination. The position statements that are relevant to this study with regard to discharges to groundwaters, include surface water drainage and the use of SuDS, discharges from contaminated surfaces (e.g. lorry parks) and from treated sewage effluent.
34 Environment Agency (2017) The Environment Agency's approach to groundwater protection. Accessed online at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/598778/LIT_7660.pdf on 19/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 33 Water Cycle Study v2-0
River Basin Management Plans River Basin Management Plans are required under the WFD and are strategies that should influence development plans. Bracknell Forest is covered by the Thames RBMP35. This is further discussed in section 3.4.3.
3.4.6 European Derived Legislation and Brexit Much of the legislation behind the regulation of the water environment derives from the UK enactment of European Union (EU) directives. Following the referendum decision of June 2016 that the United Kingdom would leave the EU, the UK Government announced that it would introduce a "Great Repeal Bill" to repeal the European Communities Act 1972 and to transpose European Union law into domestic law "wherever practical". This Bill is likely to be introduced early in the next parliament, but a draft was not available at the time of writing. However, a White Paper published in March 201736 states the following objectives for the Bill: • Repeal of European Communities Act (ECA) 1972 • Conversion of EU law into UK law • Conversion of directly applicable EU laws into UK law • Preservation of secondary legislation made under the ECA EU regulations - as they applied in the UK the moment before the country leaves the EU - will be converted into domestic law by the Bill and will continue to apply until legislators in the UK decide otherwise. "The Great Repeal Bill will ensure that the whole body of existing EU environmental law continues to have effect in UK law. This will provide businesses and stakeholders with maximum certainty as we leave the EU. We will then have the opportunity, over time, to ensure our legislative framework is outcome driven and delivers on our overall commitment to improve the environment within a generation. The Government recognizes the need to consult on future changes to the regulatory frameworks, including through parliamentary scrutiny." It is therefore assumed for the purposes of this study that European Union derived environmental legislation, most significantly the Water Framework Directive, will continue to be a key driver for environmental planning during the plan period for the CLP. Should this situation change, a review of this Water Cycle Study may be required considering any new emerging regulatory requirements.
3.5 Water Industry Policy
3.5.1 The Water Industry in England Water and sewerage services in England and Wales are provided by 10 Water and Sewerage Companies (WaSCs) and 12 'water-only' companies. The central legislation relating to the industry is the Water Industry Act 1991. The companies essentially operate as regulated monopolies within their supply regions, although very large water users and developments are able to obtain water and/or wastewater services from alternative suppliers - these are known as inset agreements. The Water Act 2014 aims to reform the water industry to make it more innovative and to increase resilience to droughts and floods. Key measures could influence the future provision of water and wastewater services include: • Non-domestic customers will be able to switch their water supplier and/or sewerage undertaker (from April 2017) • New businesses will be able to enter the market to supply these services • Measures to promote a national water supply network • Enabling developers to make connections to water and sewerage systems
35 Environment Agency (Dec 2015) Part 1: Thames river basin district River basin management plan Accessed online at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/500548/Thames_RBD_Part_1_river_basin_managem ent_plan.pdf on 19/04/2017 36 "Our Approach to the Great Repeal Bill" UK Government 2017 Accessed online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604516/Great_repeal_bill_white_paper_accessible.pdf on: 20-04-17
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 34 Water Cycle Study v2-0
3.5.2 Regulations of the Water Industry The water industry is primarily regulated by three regulatory bodies; • The Water Services Regulation Authority (OfWAT) – economic/ customer service regulation • Environment Agency - environmental regulation • Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) - drinking water quality Every five years the industry submits a Business Plan to OfWAT for a Price Review (PR). These plans set out the company's operational expenditure (OPEX) and capital expenditure (CAPEX) required to maintain service standards, enhance service (for example where sewer flooding occurs), to accommodate growth and to meet environmental objectives defined by the Environment Agency. OfWAT assesses and compares the plans with the objective of ensuring what are effectively supply monopolies and operating efficiently. The industry is currently in Asset Management Plan 6 (AMP6) which runs from 2015 to 2020. When considering investment requirements to accommodate growing demand, water companies are required to ensure a high degree of certainty that additional assets will be required before funding them. Longer term growth is, however, considered by the companies in their internal asset planning processes and in their 25-year Strategic Direction Statements and WRMPs.
3.5.3 Developer Contributions and Utility Companies Developments with planning permission have a right to connect to the public water and sewerage systems, although this doesn’t preclude the requirement to ensure capacity exists to serve a development. Developers may either requisition a water supply connection or sewerage system, or self-build the assets and offer these for adoption by the water company or sewerage undertaker. Self-build and adoption are usually practiced for assets within the site boundary, whereas requisitions are normally used where an extension of upgrading the infrastructure requires construction on third party land. The cost of requisitions is shared between the water company and developer as defined in the Water Industry Act 1991. Where a water company is concerned that a new development may impact upon their service to customers or the environment (for example by causing foul sewer flooding or pollution) they may request the LPA to impose a Grampian condition, whereby the planning permission cannot be implemented until a third-party action to secure necessary upgrading or contributions. The above arrangements are third party transactions because the Town and Country Planning Act Section 106 agreements and Community Infrastructure Levy agreements may not be used to obtain funding for water or wastewater infrastructure.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 35 Water Cycle Study v2-0
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 36 Water Cycle Study v2-0
4 Water Resources and Water Supply
4.1 Introduction
4.1.1 Surface Waters Figure 4-1 below shows the watercourses present in Bracknell Forest. There are two main rivers: the Cut and Blackwater River. The Cut to the north of Bracknell is fed by several small brooks running through Bracknell itself and eventually meets the Thames 3 km north of Bracknell Forest. The River Blackwater forms the southern boundary of Bracknell Forest and is fed by several brooks in the Sandhurst area, this joins the River Loddon and eventually the River Thames. Numerous other small watercourses are present on the edge of Bracknell Forest. Figure 4-1 Surface waters present in Bracknell Forest
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 37 Water Cycle Study v2-0
4.1.2 Geology Figure 4-2 shows the bedrock geology for the Bracknell Forest Council area which is a mix of Bracklesham Group and Barton Group sand, silt and clay, and Thames Group clay, silt, sand and gravel. Figure 4-2 Bedrock Geology in Bracknell Forest
4.2 Availability of Water Resources
4.2.1 Overview of Water Resource Management The Environment Agency (EA), working through their Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (CAMS) process, prepare an Abstraction Licensing Strategy (ALS) for each sub-catchment within a river basin. This licensing strategy sets out how water resources are managed in different areas of England, and contributes to implementing the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The ALS report provides information on the resources available and what conditions might apply to new licenses. The licences require abstractions to stop or reduce when a flow or water level falls below a specific threshold, as a restriction to protect the environment and manage the balance between supply and demand for water users. The CAMS process is published in a series of ALSs for each river basin. For clarity, the term ALS will be used in this report. All new licences, and some existing licenses, are time limited. This allows time for a periodic review of the specific area as circumstances may have changed since the licences were initially granted. These are generally given for a twelve-year duration, but shorter license durations may also be granted. This is usually based on the resource assessment and environmental sustainability. In some cases, future plans or changes may mean that the EA will grant a shorter time limited licence, so it can be re-assessed following the change. If a licence is only required for a short time period, it can be granted either as a temporary licence or with a short time limit. If a licence is considered to pose a risk to the environment it may be granted with a short time limit while monitoring is carried
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 38 Water Cycle Study v2-0
out. The licences are then replaced with a changed licence, revoked or renewed near to the expiry date. The ALS are important in terms of the Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) as this helps to determine the current and future pressures on water resources and how the supply and demand will be managed by the relevant water companies37. Bracknell Forest is covered by two ALS areas: Thames Corridor and Loddon as shown in Figure 4-3 below. The Thames Basin catchment is too large to consider as one ALS region and is therefore split into 14 smaller sub-catchments, and Bracknell Forest falls across two of these. Thames Corridor ALS in the north and east of Bracknell Forest, and the Loddon ALS to the south and west. Figure 4-3 ALS Regions Relevant to Bracknell Forest
4.2.2 Resource Availability Assessment In order to abstract surface water, it is important to understand what water resources are available within a catchment and where abstraction for consumptive purposes will not pose a risk to resources or the environment. The Environment Agency has developed a classification system which shows: • The relative balance between the environmental requirements for water and how much has been licensed for abstraction; • whether there is more water available for abstraction in the area; • areas where abstraction may need to be reduced. The availability of water for abstraction is determined by the relationship between the fully licensed (all abstraction licences being used to full capacity) and recent actual flows (amount of water abstracted in the last 6 years) in relation to the Environmental Flow Indicator (EFI). Results are displayed using different water resource availability colours, further explained in Table 4 1. In some cases, water may be scarce at low flows, but available for abstraction at higher flows. Licences can be granted that protect low flows, this usually takes the form of a "Hands-off Flow" (HOF) or Hands- off Level (HOL) condition on a licence. Groundwater availability as a water resource is assessed similarly, unless better information on principle aquifers is available or if there are local issues that need to be taken into account.
37 Environment Agency (2013) Managing Water Abstraction. Accessed Online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/water- abstraction-licensing-strategies-cams-process (20/04/2017)
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 39 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Table 4-1: Implications of Surface Water Resource Availability Colours
Water Resource Implications for Licensing Availability Colour
There is more water than required to meet the needs of the environment. Due to High hydrological the need to maintain the near pristine nature of the water body, further regime abstraction is severely restricted. Water available for There is more water than required to meet the needs of the environment. licensing Licences can be considered depending on local/downstream impacts. Fully Licensed flows fall below the Environmental Flow Indicator (EFI). Restricted water If all licensed water is abstracted there will not be enough water left for the needs available for of the environment. No new consumptive licences would be granted. It may also licensing be appropriate to investigate the possibilities for reducing fully licensed risks. Water may be available via licence trading.
Recent Actual flows are below the Environmental Flow Indicator (EFI). Water not available This scenario highlights water bodies where flows are below the indicative flow for licensing requirement to help support Good Ecological Status. No further licences will be granted. Water may be available via licence trading.
HMWBs (and /or These water bodies have a modified flow that is influenced by reservoir discharge rich water compensation releases or they have flows that are augmented. There may be bodies) water available for abstraction in discharge rich catchments.
4.2.2.1 Thames Corridor ALS (TCAMS) The Thames Corridor ALS38, referred to as TCAMS, extends the length of the non-tidal River Thames, from its source near to Kemble, through to the non-tidal limit at Teddington, and is the largest CAMS area covering the majority of Bracknell Forest. The TCAMS area supports significant abstractions for public water supply and to a lesser extent industry and agriculture. These are from both groundwater and the River Thames itself. There are six gauging stations within the TCAMS area along the non-tidal Thames, with the closest to the study area being AP5 (Windsor gauging station) and AP6 (Kingston gauging station). AP6 is particularly significant as the resource availability at this gauging station overrides the availability at the other gauging stations and in the tributary ALS including the Loddon. A bespoke licencing strategy has been adopted in the TCAMS area based on a tiered approach. The resource assessment process calculated that in order to protect the requirements for minimum flow at the critical AP6, an HOF of Q21 (7209 Ml/d) was required, i.e. abstraction will only be permitted at flows that occur 21% of the time or less. Investigations have shown that the current management of abstraction in the Lower Thames is not preventing the WFD requirement of “Good ecological status/potential” being met, and there was no evidence to suggest that significantly reducing abstraction would benefit the river. It was therefore decided to retain the existing Q50 HOF for the majority of abstractions. The licencing strategy has the following levels: • New consumptive licences below 2 Ml/d – no abstraction will take place when the average of the daily mean flows of the proceeding 5 days gauged at Kingston is less than or equal to Q50 (1780 Ml/d). • New consumptive licences above 2 Ml/d – an HOF between Q21 and Q50 will be applied based on perceived risk to the waterbody. The applicant must provide a WFD assessment to show the abstraction will not cause environmental deterioration under the WFD or prevent the achievement of “Good ecological status/potential”. • For abstractions of all sizes – additional HOFs may be applied to protect local features or existing abstractors.
38 Thames catchment abstraction licensing strategy (2014) Accessed online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/321005/LIT_1855.pdf on: (01/03/2017)
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 40 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Resource availability for AP5 and AP6 after the application of the licencing strategy is presented in Table 4-2 below. Table 4-2: Thames Corridor ALS resource availability
Local Days HOF Resourc HOF Q Gauging AP Name ALS e p.a. (Ml/d) station (1) Availabi (2) (3) at AP? lity
50 Windsor Restricted Thames 5 gauging water (If abstraction 183 1,780 Yes Corridor station available less than <2 Ml/d)
50 Kingston Restricted Thames 6 gauging water (If abstraction 183 1,780 Yes Corridor station available less than <2 Ml/d)
(1) Hands off Flow restriction (2) Number of days per annum abstraction may be available (3) Approximate volume available at restriction (Ml/D)
Reliability of consumptive abstraction within the TCAMS area is dependent on the level of abstraction (due to the application of the bespoke licencing system). For abstractions greater than 2 Ml/d, reliability is less than 30%, therefore abstraction is only possible for approximately 77 days per year. For abstractions of 2 Ml/d or less, reliability is >50% and <70% and so abstraction is possible approximately 183 days per year. All new licences have a common end date (CED), the last CED was 31st March 2016, and the next is 31st March 2028. Consumptive groundwater licences which do not have a direct impact upon main river flows may be permitted, but may be subject to restrictions such as prescribed groundwater levels. Restrictions will be determined on a case-by-case basis, dependent upon the nature and scale of any abstraction. Within the TCAMS areas there is an area of confined chalk south of Windsor. This aquifer does not directly or indirectly contribute to flow in the River Thames and is not linked to any of the assessment points. As it does not have an outcrop area, it receives no direct recharge, being maintained by inflow from the Maidenhead aquifer, River Loddon and River Wey chalk outcrops. Groundwater levels are therefore sensitive to abstraction, with large scale abstraction unlikely to be viable. Small scale abstraction will be subject to a local assessment.
4.2.2.2 Loddon ALS The Loddon ALS39 area extends from Twyford in the north to Basingstoke in the south west and Aldershot in the southwest, and covers the south west third of Bracknell Forest. It has seven assessment points, the catchments for two of these, AP1 and AP7, are relevant to this study. Both assessment points have a local resource status of “water available for licencing”. However, consumptive abstraction licences in this area are constrained by the need to maintain flow in the Lower Thames, and the Q50 restriction as measured at Kingston gauging station will apply. There may be situations where the Loddon ALS area is subject to a dual HOF. Where this is applied, abstraction must cease when either the local or the TCAMs condition is met, and can only resume once all conditions are clear.
39 Loddon Catchment Abstraction Licensing Strategy (2012) Accessed online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/289881/LIT_1777_a16a18.pdf on: (01/03/2017)
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 41 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Table 4-3: Loddon ALS resource availability
Days HOF Local HOF Q Gauging AP Name ALS Resource p.a. (Ml/d) station (1) Availability (2) (3) at AP? 50 Lower Restricted (If 1 Loddon 183 1780 Yes Loddon water available abstraction less than <2 Ml/d) 50 Restricted (If 7 Blackwater Loddon 183 1780 Yes water available abstraction less than <2 Ml/d) (1) Hands off Flow restriction (2) Number of days per annum abstraction may be available (3) Approximate volume available at restriction (Ml/D)
Reliability of consumptive abstraction within the Loddon area is dependent upon conditions in the TCAMS area. For abstractions greater than 2 Ml/d, reliability is less than 30%, therefore abstraction is only possible for approximately 77 days per year. For abstractions of 2 Ml/d or less, reliability is >50% and <70% and so abstraction is possible approximately 183 days per year. A chalk formation to the south provides the dominant aquifer in the area. The groundwater availability in the Loddon ALS region is guided by the surface water assessment unless specific information on principle aquifers exists or local issues that need protecting overrule it.
4.2.3 Recommendations for Better Management Practices The main options for this identified in the ALS are to adopt water efficiency and demand management techniques. Methods include: • Testing the level of water efficiency before granting an abstraction licence, • Promoting efficient use of water, • Taking actions to limit the demand, • Reducing leakage; and • Embedding policies for low-water consumption design in new buildings into spatial plans. This would ultimately cut the growth in abstraction and limit the impacts on flow and the ecology.
4.2.4 Water Stress Water stress is a measure of the level of demand for water (from domestic, business and agricultural users) compared to the available freshwater resources, whether surface or groundwater. Water stress causes deterioration of the water environment in both the quality and quantity of water, and consequently restricts the ability of a waterbody from achieving a "Good Status" under the WFD. The Environment Agency has undertaken an assessment of water stress across the UK. This defines a water stressed area as where: • "The current household demand for water is a high proportion of the current effective rainfall which is available to meet that demand; or • The future household demand for water is likely to be a high proportion of the effective rainfall available to meet that demand." In the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales assessment40 both the Affinity Water and South East Water supply regions are classed as areas of "serious" water stress.
40 Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales (2013) Water Stressed Areas - Final Classification. Accessed online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/244333/water-stressed-classification-2013.pdf on: 27/02/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 42 Water Cycle Study v2-0
4.3 Water Resource Assessment: Water Resource Management Plans When new development within a Local Planning Authority is being planned, it is important to ensure that there are sufficient water resources in the area to cover the increase in demand without risk of shortages in the future or during periods of high demand, and without causing a negative impact on the waterbodies from which water is abstracted. The aim of this assessment was to compare the future additional demand as a result of development proposed within the emerging Comprehensive Local Plan, with the demand allowed for by Affinity Water and South East Water in their Water Resource Management Plans. The water resources assessment has been carried out utilising two approaches; initially by reviewing the Water Resource Management Plans (WRMPs) of Affinity and South East Water, and secondly by providing the water companies with growth scenarios for each settlement allowing them to assess each settlement and the housing yields proposed.
Figure 4-4 Water Supply Company Supply Boundaries
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 43 Water Cycle Study v2-0
4.3.1 Methodology Affinity Water and South East Water's Water Resource Management Plans (WRMP)41,42 were reviewed and attention was mainly focussed upon: • The available water resources and future pressures which may impact upon the supply element of the supply/demand balance • The allowance within those plans for housing and population growth and its impact upon the demand side of the supply/demand balance The results were assessed using a red / amber / green traffic light definition to score the water resource zone:
Adopted WRMP has planned Insufficient evidence in Adopted WRMP does not take for the increase in demand, or adopted WRMP to confirm that into consideration the planned sufficient time to address the planned increase in increase in demand. Additional supply demand issues in the demand can be met. water resources may be required. next WRMP.
4.3.2 Data Collection The datasets used to assess the water resource capacity were: • Sites for potential development locations in GIS format (provided by BFC) • Site details including location, proposed use and housing capacity (provided by BFC) • Water company and water resource zone boundaries (provided by Affinity Water and South East Water) • Water Resource Management Plans (provided by Affinity Water and South East Water)
4.3.3 Results
4.3.3.1 Affinity Water Affinity Water's Central Region is split into six water resource zones (WRZs) and the east of Bracknell Forest is in WRZ6, serving the existing settlements of North Ascot, Winkfield and Maiden's Green. Affinity Water provided WRMP Annual Review reports for 201543 and 201644 to ensure that the WCS references their latest published position on water resources. The Supply-Demand Balance A supply / demand deficit is forecast for 7 of the 8 zones by 2040, including in WRZ6. The baseline Dry-Year Annual Average (DYAA) in 2015 shows a marginal deficit of 0-1 Ml/d and the Dry Year Critical Period (DYCP) shows a surplus of 1-10 Ml/d. The deficit across the central region will require a substantial investment to address, and Affinity's preferred plan outlined in the WRMP includes savings of 20 ML/d from addressing distribution network leakage, and 29 ML/d from the roll out of universal metering, customer supply pipe repairs and distribution of water efficient devices.
41 Affinity Water (2014) Final Water Resources Management Plan, 2015-2020. Accessed online at: https://stakeholder.affinitywater.co.uk/docs/FINAL-WRMP-Jun-2014.pdf on 15/03/2017 42 South East Water (2014) Water Resources Management Plan, 2015-2020. Accessed online at: http://www.southeastwater.co.uk/about-us/our-plans/water-resources-management-plan/wrmp-library on 15/03/2017 43 Affinity Water (2015) Water Resource Management Plan 2010 - 2035 Final Annual Review 44 Affinity Water (2016) Water Resource Management Plan 2015 - 2040 First Annual Review
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 44 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Population and Household Growth Affinity Water used Experian to produce household and population forecasts for their coverage areas. The dataset produced was based upon local authority plans and forecast population growth of 15% in WRZ6 (2012/13 - 2040), and growth in the number of households of 20%. Table 4-4: Growth forecasts used by Affinity Water in WRZ6
Current Forecast by Forecast by % Increase Unit (2012/13) 2020 2040 by 2040
Population 526,624 545,207 604,945 15%
Households 192,458 201,030 230,256 20%
To provide a comparison using the latest available household projections, the Department for Communities and Local Government's (DCLG's) February 2016 estimates of household growth45 were collated for the eleven local authorities which form the WRZ6. An estimate of the percentage of the current population of each local authority within the WRZ was applied. The assessment has used DCLG figures for Bracknell Forest, because they are available for all LPAs within the water resource zone, and over a consistent timescale. Table 4-5: Household growth in WRZ based on DCLG forecasts
Est. % Local Households - Entire LPA Households - WRZ pop. Planning within Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Authority 2012/13 2012/13 WRZ by 2020 by 2040 by 2020 by 2040 Ealing 25% 125,654 137,400 169,474 31,414 34,350 42,369 Hillingdon 5% 102,951 117,748 154,702 5,148 5,887 7,735 Hounslow 25% 97,389 112,173 145,798 24,347 28,043 36,450 Bracknell 15% 46,811 51,068 59,580 7,022 7,660 8,937 Forest UA Windsor and Maidenhead 20% 59,054 62,915 73,505 11,811 12,583 14,701 UA Elmbridge 40% 53,174 55,541 64,628 21,270 22,216 25,851 Guildford 20% 54,652 59,479 69,505 10,930 11,896 13,901 Runnymede 100% 33,070 36,222 43,785 33,070 36,222 43,785 Spelthorne 75% 40,050 42,654 51,590 30,038 31,991 38,693 Surrey Heath 40% 33,884 35,753 40,395 13,554 14,301 16,158 Woking 100% 39,577 41,286 47,440 39,577 41,286 47,440 Total 653,196 716,017 876,617 195,109 210,214 252,234 Percentage 10% 34% 8% 29% change
This comparison indicates that the latest DCLG forecasts for household growth in WRZ (29%) are significantly greater than those used for the same period in the WRMP (20%), which could indicate that the WRMP underestimated future growth and hence demand. However, the 2016 WRMP Annual Review compares WRMP forecasts of population growth with "actual" population growth, based on the net increase in properties multiplied by an average household occupancy. These "outturn" figures are lower, across the Affinity Water supply area, than those forecast in the 2014 WRMP. This demonstrates that Affinity Water regularly review their demand forecasts and adjust
45 Department for Communities and Local Government (2016) 2014-Based Household Projections, 2012 - 2039. Accessed online at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-household-projections on 08/08/2016
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 45 Water Cycle Study v2-0
their plans through the WRMP process. This discrepancy in growth forecasts underlines the need for this process. Per-Capita Consumption Within their WRZ6, Affinity Water have predicted a future reduction in Normal Year Annual Average (NYAA) household per capita consumption (PCC) from 165 litres/person/day in 2014/15 to 147 l/p/d in 2039/40 as an average across measured and in unmeasured households. Consumption in new homes compared to existing homes is not separately reported. The option to require new homes to be designed to limit average PCC to 110 l/p/d would therefore contribute to meeting these targeted reductions in household water consumption. The Preferred Plan The WRMP has identified the following measures specifically aimed at maintaining the supply- demand balance in WRZ6. Table 4-6: Options identified in WRMP for WRZ6 Option Identified Planned Delivery Date Metering: community integrated AMR & water efficiency 2024 Water audits for commercial customers (process and non- 2020 process) Leakage reduction - pressure management with new pressure 2035 relief valves Additional water efficiency for households 2033 Increased import from Thames Water 2036 Local source recommissioning 2038 Leakage reduction by ALC 2015-2040 (2.23 Ml/d) 2015 Dual flush WCs for households 2035
4.3.3.2 South East Water: South East Water's WRZ4 covers Bracknell, Maidenhead, Basingstoke and Aldershot. It serves the majority of the population within Bracknell Forest, including Bracknell, Binfield, Crowthorne and Sandhurst. The Supply-Demand Balance The supply demand balance is positive for the immediate period (2015-2020), but subsequent to that there is a deficit during peak demand from 2020. Population and Household Growth South East Water has also obtained population and household growth predictions from Experian, however they chose a different data set to base their demand calculations on. The dataset chosen was a "plan based" forecast using information provided by local authorities. This is very similar to the "trend based" forecast using the DCLG projections, and is closely aligned with the population growth data used in the SHMA. Population growth is forecast to be 23%, and household growth, 27%. Table 4-7: South East Water population growth forecast.
Base-Year % Increase 2012/13 2019/20 2039/40 11/12 by 2040
Population 654,111 657,919 699,108 803,039 23%
Households 265,202 268,649 289,003 341,291 27%
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 46 Water Cycle Study v2-0
To provide a comparison using the latest available household projections, the Department for Communities and Local Government's (DCLG's) February 2016 estimates of household growth46 were collated for the nine local authorities which form the WRZ4. An estimate of the percentage of the current population of each local authority within the WRZ was applied. The assessment has used DCLG figures for Bracknell Forest, because they are available for all LPAs within the water resource zone, and over a consistent timescale. Table 4-8: Estimated household growth in each Local Authority
Est. Households - Entire LPA Households - WRZ Local % Planning pop. Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast 2012/13 2012/13 Authority within by 2020 by 2040 by 2020 by 2040 WRZ Bracknell 85% 45,843 49,910 58,914 38,967 42,424 50,077 Forest Windsor and 50% 58,213 61,752 72,494 29,107 30,876 36,247 Maidenhead Wokingham 40% 60,308 64,410 75,073 24,123 25,764 30,029 Basingstoke 75% 68,673 74,485 88,020 51,505 55,864 66,015 and Deane East Hants 30% 47,049 49,561 57,075 14,115 14,868 17,123 Hart 100% 35,645 37,303 41,305 35,645 37,303 41,305 Rushmoor 100% 36,243 38,359 42,459 36,243 38,359 42,459 Guildford 10% 53,816 58,213 68,610 5,382 5,821 6,861 Surrey 60% 33,491 35,204 39,959 20,095 21,122 23,975 Heath Total 385,465 410,984 475,299 249,798 266,580 307,230 Percentage 7% 23% 7% 23% change
This comparison indicates that the latest DCLG forecasts for household growth in WRZ (23%) are slightly lower than those used for the same period in the WRMP (27%). Therefore, the WRMP's allowance for increased water demand because of household growth is robust. Per-Capita Consumption South East Water have predicted a future reduction in Normal Year Annual Average (NYAA) household per capita consumption (PCC) from 166 l/p/d to 149 l/p/d in 2039/40 averaged across all their WRZs. This reduction is driven in part by the assumption that new properties will have a PCC 20% lower than older properties in line with the Code for Sustainable Homes standard. Note that, whilst the Code for Sustainable Homes has been withdrawn since the WRMP was published, this objective to reduce consumption in new homes is broadly in line with application of the optional 110l/person/day design standard within Building Regulations.
46 Department for Communities and Local Government (2016) 2014-Based Household Projections, 2012 - 2039. Accessed online at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-household-projections on 08/08/2016
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 47 Water Cycle Study v2-0
The Preferred Plan The South East Water WRMP has identified the following measures specifically aimed at maintaining the supply-demand balance in WRZ4. Table 4-9: South East Water WRMP Preferred plan proposals
Period Preferred plan proposals Leakage reductions 2015-2020 Water efficiency strategy Boxall's Lane groundwater scheme Leakage reductions 2020-2030 Water efficiency strategy Improvements to existing treatment works Leakage reductions 2030-2040 Water efficiency strategy Windsor to Surrey Hills regional transfer scheme
4.3.4 Preparation for the 2019 Water Resource Management Plans All water companies in England and Wales are currently preparing their next WRMPs, which will cover the period 2019 to 2034. Affinity Water and South East Water have confirmed that they are co-operating, along with other water companies in the south east, to prepare a consistent approach to demand forecasting. Experian have been commissioned by this group of companies to gather plans for future housing and employment growth from local authorities in the region. At the time of writing, this study had been completed by Experian and distributed to the water companies who are in the process of finalising the forecasts, therefore it was not available to be referenced by the WCS. However, it has been confirmed that BFC have responded to the Experian questionnaire. Therefore, there is evidence that BFC, Affinity Water and South East Water are co-operating to ensure their plans align and that local authorities' projections are fully taken into consideration within the next round of WRMPs.
4.3.5 Conclusions The two WRMPs demonstrate the pressures on water resources in the Affinity Water and South East Water supply zones with increasing demand, population growth, resource uncertainty, the impacts of climate change and the need to reduce their environmental impacts. The latest DCLG forecast for household growth within Affinity Water's WRZ6 (29%) is significantly higher than allowed for in the WRMP (20%). However, Affinity's analysis of recent household growth indicates that it has been lower than DCLG forecasts. There is sufficient time, within the water resource management planning process, for changes in demand because of household growth to be identified and addressed through supply-side or demand management measures. The latest DCLG forecast for household growth within South East Water's WRZ4 (23%) is slightly lower than allowed for in the WRMP (27%). Therefore, the WRMP is based on a robust estimate of household growth. Both companies, along with other water companies in South East England, are co- operating on developing population and household forecasts for the next WRMP in 2019. Whilst neither water company has relied on new homes being more water-efficient than existing metered homes, the opportunity, through the planning system, to ensure that new homes do meet the higher standard of 110l/person/day, at nominal additional cost to the developer, would be in line with general principals of sustainable development, and reducing energy consumed in the treatment and supply of water. Similarly, for non-residential buildings, there is an opportunity to use the BREEAM standard to require percentage improvement over baseline building water consumption of at least 12.5%. The overall RAG assessment for Bracknell Forest’s water resources is green, on the basis that there is sufficient time to address the supply demand issues identified in the next WRMP. No further assessment of water resources is recommended for the Phase 2 Outline WCS.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 48 Water Cycle Study v2-0
4.3.6 Recommendations The recommendations for water resources are: Table 4-10: Water resource recommendations
Action Responsibility Timescale Continue to regularly review forecast and actual household growth across the supply region through WRMP Annual Update Affinity Water reports, and where significant change is predicted, engage with South East Ongoing Local Planning Authorities. Take the latest growth forecasts into Water account in the emerging 2019 WRMP. BFC and other LPAs in the Provide yearly profiles of projected housing growth to water Affinity WRZ6 Ongoing companies to inform the WRMP and SE Water WRZ4. Use planning policy to require the 110l/person/day water consumption target permitted by National Planning Policy In Guidance in water-stressed areas, and use the BREEAM BFC Comprehensive standard to require percentage improvement over baseline Local Plan building water consumption of at least 12.5%. Water companies should advise BFC of any strategic water resource infrastructure developments within the council's Affinity Water In boundary, where these may require safeguarding of land to South East Comprehensive prevent other type of development occurring. At present, none Water Local Plan have been identified.
4.4 Water Supply Infrastructure Assessment An increase in water demand adds pressure to the existing supply infrastructure. This is likely to manifest itself as low pressure at times of high demand. An assessment is required to identify whether the existing infrastructure is adequate or whether upgrades will be required. The time required to plan, obtain funding and construct major pipeline works can be considerable and therefore water companies and planners need to work closely together to ensure that the infrastructure is able to meet growing demand. Water supply companies make a distinction between supply infrastructure, the major pipelines, reservoirs and pumps that transfer water around a WRZ, and distribution systems, smaller scale assets which convey water around settlements to customers. This scoping study is focused on the supply infrastructure. It is expected that developers should fund water company impact assessments and modelling of the distribution systems to determine requirements for local capacity upgrades to the distribution systems.
4.4.1 Methodology Affinity Water and South East Water were provided with a complete list of sites and the potential / equivalent housing numbers for each. Using this information, the companies were asked to comment on the impact of the proposed growth on water supply infrastructure in the Bracknell Forest area. A R/A/G assessment was followed using the following definitions to score each site:
Infrastructure and/or treatment Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades are required to upgrades will be required to Capacity available to serve the serve proposed growth, but no serve proposed growth. Major proposed growth significant constraints to the constraints have been provision of this infrastructure identified. have been identified
4.4.2 Data collection The data sets used to assess the water supply and distribution capacity are the following: • Site locations in GIS format (provided by Bracknell Forest Council) • A technical note outlining the growth scenario and potential housing numbers for each site • Site tracker spreadsheet (See Appendix B)
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 49 Water Cycle Study v2-0
4.4.3 Results Affinity Water Affinity Water have reviewed the list of potential development sites, and have identified which could be served by their supply network. These include all sites within Winkfield parish, plus one site, WAR17 in Warfield parish. Current and future demand scenarios were modelled for peak summer demand conditions. They concluded that: • The pressure drop at the critical point both in terms of minimum level of service required (>15m) and percentage drop (5%) is enough to justify major reinforcements in the network in the area when all future developments in Affinity Water records and Bracknell Forest sites are taken into account. • All the proposed reinforcements will aim to recover the current level of service and the loss of capacity in the network due to the additional load imposed by the whole future demand. • Each developer will contribute to the required reinforcements depending on the relative impact on the network. On this basis, the water supply network in the area supplied by Affinity Water is given an Amber RAG score. Full details of the Affinity Water assessment are included in Appendix C.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 50 Water Cycle Study v2-0
South East Water South East Water have reviewed the list of potential development sites, and have identified which could be served by their supply network. These include all sites within Binfield, Bracknell Town, Crowthorne and Sandhurst parishes, and most of the Warfield parish. SEW have confirmed that they can provide supply to all the sites proposed in their area. On this basis, the water supply network in the area supplied by SEW is given a Green RAG score.
4.4.4 Conclusions All sites within Winkfield parish, plus site WAR17 within Warfield parish, would be served by Affinity Water. The additional demand of these developments would lead to unacceptable reductions in pressure during periods of peak demand, and therefore infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. No additional assessments are required within the Affinity Water supply area in the phase 2 outline WCS. All sites within the Binfield, Bracknell Town, Crowthorne, Sandhurst parishes and the majority of Warfield parish would be served by South East Water who have confirmed that they can provide supply to all of the sites proposed in their area. No additional assessments are required within the South East Water supply area in the phase 2 outline WCS.
4.4.5 Recommendations The recommendations from the water supply assessments are shown in Table 4-11. Table 4-11: Water Supply Recommendations
Action Responsibility Timescale Undertake technical studies to understand options to provide sufficient bulk and South East Water Ongoing local transfer capacity and communicate results with BFC. Developers should seek early consultation with Affinity Water and South East Water Developers to ensure adequate time is Affinity Water Ongoing available to provide local South East Water distribution mains upgrades to meet additional demand.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 51 Water Cycle Study v2-0
5 Wastewater Collection Thames Water is the Sewerage Undertaker (SU) for Bracknell Forest. The role of sewerage undertaker includes the collection and treatment of wastewater from domestic and commercial premises, and in some areas, it also includes the drainage of surface water from building curtilages to combined or surface water sewers. It excludes, unless adopted by Thames Water, systems that do not connect directly to the wastewater network, e.g. Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) or highway drainage. At present, Thames Water do not adopt most forms of SuDS systems, however they will adopt conventional piped surface water drainage systems downstream of private or third- party SuDS, where these drain the building curtilage. Increased wastewater flows into collection systems due to growth in populations or per-capita consumption can lead to an overloading of the infrastructure, increasing the risk of sewer flooding and, where present, increasing the frequency of discharges from Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs). Likewise, headroom at Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) can be eroded by growth in population or per-capita consumption, requiring investment in additional treatment capacity. As the volumes of treated effluent rises, even if the effluent quality is maintained, the pollutant load discharged to the receiving watercourse will increase. In such circumstances the Environment Agency as the environmental regulator, may tighten consented effluent consents to achieve a "load standstill", i.e. ensuring that as effluent volume increases, the pollutant discharged does not increase. Again, this would require investment by the water company to improve the quality of the treated effluent. In combined sewerage systems, or foul systems with surface water misconnections, there is potential to create headroom in the system, thus enabling additional growth, by the removal of surface water connections. This can most readily be achieved during the redevelopment of brownfield sites which have combined sewerage systems, where there is potential to discharge surface waters via sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to groundwater, watercourses or surface water sewers. In some rural areas of Bracknell, there are known issues of surface water drainage to foul-only systems, possibly as a result of misconnections or failure of soakaways. Strategic schemes to provide improved local surface water drainage may be required in such areas, rather than solely relying upon on-site soakaways on brownfield or infill plots.
5.1 Sewerage System Capacity Assessment New residential developments add pressure to the existing sewerage systems. An assessment is required to identify the available capacity within the existing systems, and the potential to upgrade overloaded systems to accommodate future growth. The scale and cost of upgrading works may vary significantly depending upon the location of the development in relation to the network itself and the receiving WwTW. It may be the case that an existing sewerage system is already working at its full capacity and further investigations have to be carried out to define which solution is necessary to implement an increase in its capacity. New infrastructure may be required if, for example, a site is not served by an existing system. Such new infrastructure will normally be secured through private third-party agreements between the developer and utility provider. Sewerage Undertakers must consider the growth in demand for wastewater services when preparing their five-yearly Strategic Business Plans (SBPs) which set out investment for the next Asset Management Plan (AMP) period. Typically, investment is committed to provide new or upgraded sewerage capacity to support allocated growth with a high certainty of being delivered. Additional sewerage capacity to service windfall sites, smaller infill development or to connect a site to the sewerage network across third party land is normally funded via developer contributions, as third-party arrangements between the developer and utility provider.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 52 Water Cycle Study v2-0
5.1.1 Methodology Thames Water were provided with a list of the sites and potential housing numbers. Using this information Thames Water assessed each site using the range of datasets they hold. Thames Water used the following red / amber / green traffic light definition to score each site:
Infrastructure and/or treatment Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades are required to upgrades will be required to Capacity available to serve the serve proposed growth, but no serve proposed growth. Major proposed growth significant constraints to the constraints have been provision of this infrastructure identified. have been identified
5.1.2 Data Collection The datasets used to assess the sewerage system capacity are the following: • Site locations in GIS format (provided by Bracknell Forest Council) • Site tracker spreadsheet (see Appendix B)
5.1.3 Results Drainage Strategies Introduction Sewerage undertakers have been required to undertake long-term planning for management of their sewerage systems. Normally called Drainage Area Plans (DAPs) but also called Sewerage Management Plans (SMPs). These have traditionally been internal documents, not shared with other Risk Management Authorities (RMAs), and have mainly (though not exclusively), focussed on foul and combined sewerage systems. In 2013, OfWAT and the Environment Agency issued joint guidance47 on how water companies should prepare public-facing Drainage Strategies, at a catchment scale, to demonstrate how they will deliver their AMP6 outcomes (for example reduced sewer flooding, reduced pollution incidents, capacity for growth) within each catchment. Drainage strategies should focus on the water company's foul, combined and surface water sewers, but also work with other RMAs to play their part in addressing wider drainage issues including flooding and water pollution. The guidance describes the six guiding principles of a drainage strategy as: • Partnership - to be optimal, strategies must be developed in partnership with customers, developers, LLFAs, planners and the EA. • Uncertainty - Strategies should acknowledge uncertainty, for example in data and the impacts of climate change, and set out how these uncertainties will be addressed (for example adaptive approaches to climate change. • Risk-based - Plans should consider the probability and consequence of inadequate drainage, and prioritise operations and investment where the risk is greatest. • Whole-life costs and benefits - strategies should promote interventions which deliver outcomes to customers and the environment at the lowest cost to customers and the community. Wider benefits (for example ecosystem services) should also be valued. • Live process - strategies should be adaptable and reviewed periodically. • Innovative and sustainable - Strategies should evaluate alternatives to traditional engineering schemes, considering innovative approaches such as active system control, surface water disconnection, customer engagement and incentivisation. Thames Water Drainage Strategies Thames Water have focussed their first batch of Drainage Strategies on catchments where they will be addressing sewer flooding and growth issues during AMP6 (2015-2020). Water companies are also required by the Environment Agency48 to prepare Infiltration Reduction Plans (IRPs) in
47 OfWAT and the Environment Agency (2013) Drainage Strategy Framework for water and sewerage companies to prepare Drainage Strategies. Accessed online at http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/rpt_com201305drainagestrategy1.pdf on 27/07/2016 48 Environment Agency (2012) Regulatory position statement: discharges made from groundwater surcharged sewers
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 53 Water Cycle Study v2-0
catchments where groundwater infiltration may lead to prolonged overflows (either at permitted Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) or at temporary overflow points) to watercourses in order to prevent sewer flooding. Many of the catchments for which TWUL has prepared strategies fall into this category, and the drainage strategies contain sections on managing infiltration. In line with the framework guidance, their strategies take a four-stage approach: Figure 5-1:Thames Water's Drainage Strategy framework and estimated delivery timetable
Thames Water have not published a drainage strategy for any of their wastewater catchments within Bracknell Forest. Comments received from Thames Water The following comment was received from Thames Water: "In terms of capital schemes there is a growth study being carried out by eight2O (Thames Water's programme delivery alliance) at the moment. They will shortly be modelling flows from the developments coming on line to ascertain where and how the local network can be upgraded. This will look at some of the previous impact study results to see if there are less intrusive ways of upgrading the local network. There are no concerns with short term flows as much of the flow in Bracknell is currently going to Ascot STW and the study is looking at making this a more permanent arrangement." Thames Water did complete a RAG assessment for the six potential strategic clusters of sites: Table 5-1: RAG assessment of clusters 1-6 for foul and surface water sewerage
Foul Sewerage Network Capacity Surface Water Network Cluster Comments Capacity Comments This RAG score just reflects the network capacity. The site is close to Bracknell Surface water should be dealt STW but there may still be storage or with on site and SUDS should be 1 upgrades required to convey the flow to incorporated. There are no the STW. Currently, cannot say surface water sewers near the categorically what upgrades if any may be development. required to the local network. This RAG score just reflects the network capacity. The site is close to Surface water should be dealt Easthampstead STW so any network with on site utilising SuDS. The 2 upgrades required may not be as hierarchy of surface water extensive as if the site was some way disposal should be followed. from the STW This site is adjacent to Easthampstead Park STW. If flows were routed there, it is unlikely network upgrades would be Surface water should be dealt required. This comment is only relevant with on site and SUDS should be 3 to the network and does not take into incorporated. There are no account STW capacity. Should the STW surface water sewers near the lack the required capacity upgrades may development. be required to the network to take flows elsewhere.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 54 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Foul Sewerage Network Capacity Surface Water Network Cluster Comments Capacity Comments This RAG score only reflects the network capacity. The site is close to Bracknell Surface water should be dealt STW but there may still be with on site and SUDS should be 4 storage/upgrades required on site and incorporated. There are no around to get the flow to the STW. At this surface water sewers near the time cannot say categorically what development. upgrades may be required to the network. Surface water should be dealt Due to the size of the development some with on site utilising SuDS. 5 network enhancements very likely There are no surface water sewers near the development. This RAG score just reflects the network capacity. The site benefits by being close Surface water should be dealt to Bracknell STW's but there may still be with on site and SUDS should be storage or upgrades required on site and 6 incorporated. There are no around to get the flow to the STW. At this surface water sewers near the time cannot say categorically what development. upgrades if any may be required to the local network.
Combined Sewer Overflows CSOs are present on many combined sewerage systems, and are designed to discharge excess flow during storm conditions to a watercourse (or occasionally to groundwater) in order to reduce the risk of sewer flooding. CSOs must be permitted by the Environment Agency, and many permits state minimum pass-forward flows which must be achieved before discharge is allowed. Population growth and development upstream of a CSO will increase the flow of wastewater in the combined sewer, and is therefore likely to increase the frequency and polluting load of a discharge from that CSO. The Environment Agency publishes details of all consented discharges to controlled waters in a database49. This was consulted for the Bracknell Forest area. No active CSO consents are recorded in Bracknell Forest, therefore the risk of development increasing the frequency of CSO discharges is low.
5.1.4 Conclusions The TW RAG assessment prepared for this scoping stage only considered clusters 1 to 6. The assessment indicates that, for the majority of these clusters, infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. The exceptions are cluster 3 (where there is adequate foul sewerage capacity) and cluster 5, which TW have given a red assessment, indicating that infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, and significant constraints have been identified. No assessment has been made for sites not located within clusters 1 to 6 at this scoping stage. Thames Water are preparing a growth study including modelling to provide a more detailed assessment of how growth will be accommodated. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should revisit this assessment, once the ongoing growth study being prepared for Thames Water is complete. This should include all clusters and stand-alone sites.
49 Environment Agency (2016) Consented Discharges to Controlled Waters with Conditions. Accessed online at https://data.gov.uk/dataset/consented-discharges-to-controlled-waters-with-conditions on 06/12/2016
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 55 Water Cycle Study v2-0
5.1.5 Recommendations Table 5-2: Wastewater Collection System Assessment Actions
Action Responsibility Timescale BFC Take into account wastewater infrastructure constraints in Ongoing phasing development in partnership with Thames Water Thames Water
Following completion of Thames Water's ongoing growth BFC study, an outline Water Cycle Study should be prepared, 2017 which should include an assessment of wastewater collection Thames system capacity. Water Thames Water and developers will be expected to work closely and early in the planning promotion process to develop an outline Drainage Strategy for sites. The Outline Drainage strategy should set out the following: What – What is required to serve the site Where – Where are the assets / upgrades to be located TW and Ongoing When – When are the assets to be delivered (phasing) Developers Which – Which delivery route is the developer going to use s104 s98 s106 etc. The Outline Drainage Strategy should be submitted as part of the planning application submission, and where required, used as a basis for a drainage planning condition to be set. Developers will be expected to demonstrate to the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) that surface water from a site will be disposed using a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) with Developers Ongoing connection to surface water sewers seen as the last option. LLFA New connections for surface water to foul sewers will be resisted by the LLFA.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 56 Water Cycle Study v2-0
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 57 Water Cycle Study v2-0
6 Wastewater Treatment Flow and Water Quality
6.1 Wastewater Treatment Works in Bracknell Forest Within Bracknell Forest, there are 5 main Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW): • Billingbear Lane WwTW • Bracknell WwTW • Ascot WwTW • Easthampstead Park WwTW • Sandhurst WwTW Camberley and Arborfield WwTWs serve settlements immediately beyond the boundary of Bracknell Forest, but do not currently receive wastewater from within Bracknell Forest, nor are they expected to in the future. The WwTWs are located in Figure 6-1, alongside the 2015 Water Framework Directive overall classifications for the watercourses into which these WwTWs discharge. A more detailed overview of each WwTW can be found in Appendix A. Figure 6-1: Wastewater Treatment Works in Bracknell Forest
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 58 Water Cycle Study v2-0
6.2 Assessing Wastewater Flow and Water Quality To initially assess the impact of growth within Bracknell Forest on wastewater flows and water quality two assessments will be completed: 1. Wastewater Treatment Flow Permit Headroom Assessment 2. Water Quality Assessment These scoping assessments aimed to answer the following questions, and, where necessary, to recommend further actions to fully assess the impact of growth on wastewater flows and water quality within Bracknell Forest. The questions are based on Environment Agency Water Cycle Study Guidance for the completion of Scoping Studies: 1. Will the proposed housing growth have a detrimental impact on water quality? 2. Is there sufficient environmental capacity within the receiving water environment to accommodate the resulting increase in flow and pollutant loads from the Wastewater Treatment Works because of the planned housing growth? 3. If not, are there alternative discharge locations that will not cause a failure of water quality targets or cause a deterioration in water quality? 4. Is there an increased risk of discharge from storm water overflows causing an adverse water quality impact? 5. Will the sewerage undertaker need to apply to increase the levels of treated sewage effluent that can be discharged under the existing environmental permits, to allow for future growth? 6. Will the quality standard on the environmental permit need to be tightened to meet existing or future water quality standards because of the proposed growth (e.g. Water Framework Directive (WFD))? 7. Can the existing sewerage and wastewater treatment networks cope with the increased wastewater the proposed growth will generate? 8. If new major infrastructure is required (wastewater treatment works, major pumping mains or sewer mains) can they be provided and funded in time? Each wastewater treatment works will be assessed individually, based on the levels of growth discussed in Section 2, however it is recommended that the cumulative impact of growth across Bracknell Forest is assessed from a water quality perspective.
6.3 Data Requirements The data required to assess the impact of growth on Wastewater Treatment Works flow permits and water quality is shown in Table 6-1. Table 6-1: Data Required for the Assessment of Water Quality
Data Required Data Source Received?
Wastewater Treatment Works Thames Water Yes WwTW locations Discharge locations Thames Water Yes
Upstream River Data Environment Agency Yes Mean flow Environment Agency Yes 95th exceedance flow Contaminant means Environment Agency Yes Contaminant standard deviations Environment Agency Yes
WwTW Discharge Data Environment Agency Yes Effluent flow statistics Contaminant statistic Environment Agency Yes
River Quality Target Data Environment Agency Yes No deterioration target Good status Target Environment Agency Yes Flow Data Dry Weather Flows (DWF) Environment Agency Yes Permits Environment Agency Yes Measured Q80 flows
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 59 Water Cycle Study v2-0
6.4 Wastewater Treatment Flow Permit Assessment
6.4.1 Introduction The Environment Agency is responsible for regulating sewage discharge releases via a system of Environmental Permits (EPs). Monitoring for compliance with these permits is the responsibility of both the EA and the plant operators. Figure 6-2 summarises the different types of wastewater releases that might take place, although precise details vary from works to works depending on the design. During dry weather, the final effluent from the Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) should be the only discharge (1). With rainfall, the storm tanks fill and eventually start discharging to the watercourse (2) and Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) upstream of the storm tanks start to operate (3). The discharge of storm sewage from treatment works is allowed only under conditions of heavy rain or snow melt, and therefore the flow capacity of treatment systems is required to be sufficient to treat all flows arising in dry weather and the increased flow from smaller rainfall events. After rainfall, storm tanks should be emptied back to full treatment, freeing their capacity for the next rainfall event. Figure 6-2: Overview of typical combined sewerage system and water recycling centre discharges
Environmental permits are used alongside water quality limits as a means of controlling the pollutant load discharged from a water recycling centre to a receiving watercourse. Sewage flow rates must be monitored for all WwTWs where the permitted discharge rate is greater than 50 m3/day in dry weather. Permitted discharges are based on a statistic known as the Dry Weather Flow (DWF). As well as being used in the setting and enforcement of effluent discharge permits, the DWF is used for water recycling centre design, as a means of estimating the ‘base flow’ in sewerage modelling and for determining the flow at which discharges to storm tanks will be permitted by the permit (Flow to Full Treatment, FFT). WwTW Environmental Permits also consent for maximum concentrations of pollutants, in most cases Suspended Solids (SS), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Ammonia (NH4). Some works (usually the larger works) also have permits for Phosphorous (P). These are determined by the Environment Agency with the objective of ensuring that the receiving watercourse is not prevented from meeting its environmental objectives, with specific regard to the Chemical Status element of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) classification. Increased domestic population and/or employment activity can lead to increased wastewater flows arriving at a WwTW. Where there is insufficient headroom at the works to treat these flows, this could lead to failures in flow consents.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 60 Water Cycle Study v2-0
6.4.2 Methodology Thames Water were provided with the list of proposed development sites and the potential housing numbers for each site (see Appendix B). They were then invited to provide an assessment of the receiving WwTWs and provide any additional comments about the impacts of the development. A parallel assessment of the WwTW capacity was carried out using measured flow data supplied by the Environment Agency. The process was as follows: • Calculate the current measured Dry Weather Flow (DWF). This was calculated as the 80- percentile exceedance flow for the period 2013 to 2015. As a check, the DWF for 2015, the last full year for which data was available at the time of request, was also calculated, and this value was used where it was greater than the 2013-15 DWF, in order to ensure that any recent trends or step changes in flow were represented within the current DWF. • The flow data was cleaned to remove zero values and low outlier values which would bring the measured DWF down. • Potential development sites and existing commitments were assigned to a WwTW using the sewerage drainage area boundaries. • For each site, the future DWF was calculated assuming an occupancy rate of 2.4p/h (assumption provided by TW), a per-capita consumption of 122 or 126 l/p/d (for sites to be served by Affinity Water or SE Water respectively) and that 95% of water used is returned to sewer (assumption provided by TW). Permitted headroom was used as a substitute for actual designed hydraulic capacity for each WwTW being assessed. In some cases, permitted DWF might relate well to the actual designed hydraulic capacity of a WwTW, in other cases it might not. TW used the following red / amber / green traffic light definition to score each site:
Infrastructure and/or treatment Infrastructure and/or upgrades will be required to treatment upgrades will be Capacity available to serve serve proposed growth, but no required to serve proposed the proposed growth significant constraints to the growth. Major constraints provision of this infrastructure have been identified. have been identified
6.4.3 Results Permit conditions for the five treatment works were obtained from the Environment Agency. Easthampstead Park and Sandhurst are both being upgraded during AMP6 (2015-2020) to meet tighter quality permit conditions in 2018. Table 6-2: WwTW Permit Conditions
Permitted BOD NH4 P Annual Proposed Maximum WwTW Operator 95%ile 95%ile Mean changes DWF (mg/l) (mg/l) (Mg/l) to permit (Ml/d)
Ascot TWUL 7.667 10 5 2
Billingbear Lane TWUL 0.020 30 None None
Bracknell TWUL 19.529 18 2 2
Ammonia permit will Easthampstead TWUL 1.857 10 10 None reduce to Park 7mg/l on 31/03/2018 Phosphorous permit will Sandhurst TWUL 13.000 9 5 2 reduce to 0.5mg/l on 31/03/2018
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 61 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Thames Water provided an assessment of WwTWs within Bracknell Forest, the proposed housing numbers managed by each WwTW and an assessment of how growth will affect the headroom capacity. The results of the assessment provided by Thames Water are summarised in Table 6-4. These results did not, however, include growth within neighbouring LPAs, the details of which had not been obtained when the data request was sent to TWUL. An alternative assessment was, therefore, prepared by JBA, with calculated growth summarised below in Table 6-3 and headroom assessment results in Table 6-5, and discussed in more detail for each WwTW below. Table 6-3: Calculation of growth by WwTW, commitments and potential future growth (all sites)
Housing growth over plan period Employment growth over plan Overview (dwellings) period (Hectares)
Within Within Within Within WwTW Study neighbouring Total Study neighbouring Total Area LPAs Area LPAs Ascot 903 691 1,594 0 0 0 Billingbear 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Bracknell 12,086 0 12,086 17,093 0 17,093
Easthampstead 612 2,220 2,832 136 0 136 Park
Sandhurst 1,941 101 2,042 5,000 0 5,000
6.4.3.1 Ascot WwTW Ascot WwTW predominantly serves settlements within the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, including Ascot, Sunninghill, Sunningdale and a part of North Ascot which is within the Royal Borough. In addition, it also serves areas of south east Bracknell, including Forest Park and Crown Wood. The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Draft Borough Local Plan of December 201650 identifies eight potential allocations within Ascot, Sunninghill and Sunningdale, totalling 691 homes to 2033. For the purposes of this assessment, it was assumed that these would be built over AMPs 6, 7 and 8 (2015 to 2030). The TWUL assessment is that Ascot has capacity to accommodate the committed and potential scale of growth to 2036, but the RAG assessment assesses Ascot WwTW as "amber", and states that "Ascot STW will require upgrades to accommodate this development." Analysis of the 2013- 15 flow data, however, indicates that Ascot WwTW exceeded its DWF permit in 2015, and the EA have advised that this is the subject of an ongoing investigation by TWUL. For this reason, the final RAG score has been set as Red. This decision was discussed and agreed with Thames Water and the Environment Agency.
50 Royal Borough of Maidenhead and Windsor (2016) Draft Borough Local Plan December 2016 Accessed online at http://consult.rbwm.gov.uk/portal/blp/blp/blp?pointId=s1465825773902 on 26/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 62 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Figure 6-3 Ascot WwTW Headroom Forecast
6.4.3.2 Billingbear WwTW Billingbear is a small WwTW serving houses on Billingbear Lane, which TW assess to be currently at full capacity. No growth is planned in the Billingbear catchment, therefore, it is not expected to require investment over the plan period to increase capacity or improve treatment because of the planned growth. Due to the small size of the works, even minor windfall development could lead to a breach of the flow permit.
6.4.3.3 Bracknell WwTW Bracknell WwTW is the largest in Bracknell Forest, and 100% of the wastewater treated at this works derives from within Bracknell Forest. This catchment is expected to accommodate much of the housing and employment growth within Bracknell Forest. The JBA analysis indicates that the flow permit would be expected to be exceeded during AMP7 (2020 to 2025) as a result of the planned growth. The TWUL RAG assessment assesses Bracknell WwTW as "amber", and states that "Bracknell STW will require upgrades to accommodate this development". Figure 6-4 Bracknell WwTW headroom forecast
6.4.3.4 Easthampstead Park WwTW The majority of the urban area served by Easthampstead Park WwTW lies within Wokingham Borough. Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) are currently preparing a Local Plan update with a
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 63 Water Cycle Study v2-0
target completion of May 2019. An Issues and Options consultation51 was undertaken in August 2016, but this does not include any site or settlement specific proposals. WBC do, however, publish a call-for-sites document which is updated monthly52. Figure 6-6 shows a number of sites to the north of Crowthorne which could be drained to Easthampstead Park. For the purpose of this assessment, we have assumed that the following sites, if developed, would drain to Easthampstead Park: 5WW002, 5WW011, 5WW014, 5WW018 and 5WW019. Note that the suitability of these sites has not been published by WBC. WBC's Core Strategy allows for 2,500 additional dwellings in the Southern Strategic Development Location, over the period 2006 to 2026. No figures were available on committed but as yet unbuilt demand within this area which will connect to Easthampstead Park. The JBA analysis indicates that the flow permit would be expected to be exceeded during AMP7 (2020 to 2025) as a result of the planned growth. The TWUL RAG assessment assesses Easthampstead Park WwTW as "red", and states that "Easthampstead Park STW will require upgrades in order to accommodate this development". A "red" assessment indicates that there are significant constraints to expanding this treatment works, although the types of constraints are not stated. This should be investigated further at stage 2. Figure 6-5 Easthampstead Park WwTW headroom forecast
51 Wokingham Borough Council (2016) Local Plan Update: Issues and Options Consultation Document 52 Wokingham Borough Council (2017) Suggested Sites List. Accessed online at: http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/planning/planning- policy/local-plan-update/ on 28/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 64 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Figure 6-6: Extract from Wokingham Borough Council Call for Sites Map
6.4.3.5 Sandhurst WwTW Approximately 50% of the Sandhurst catchment serves the settlements of Yateley and Blackwater, within Hart District. Hart District Council is currently consulting on the Draft Local Plan Strategy and Sites 2011-203253, which identifies one new housing site in Yateley. In addition, their five-year housing land supply54 includes two housing sites in Yateley and Blackwater, and these have been included in the assessment. The TWUL and JBA analyses indicate that Sandhurst WwTW has capacity to accommodate all planned growth during the plan period, both from Bracknell Forest and from Wokingham. Figure 6-7 Sandhurst WwTW Headroom Forecast
53 Hart District Council (2017) Draft Hart Local Plan Strategy and Sites 2011-2032 54 Hart District Council (2016) Hart Five Year Land Supply (at 1st April 2016)
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - 65 Water Cycle Study v2-0
Table 6-4: Wastewater Treatment Works Flow and Quality Consent Assessment - Thames Water Assessment
DWF (Ml/d) Capacity by 2036 Headroom by DWF Consented WwTW (Surplus/ 2036 % of AMP6 Schemes Volume (Ml/d) 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 Shortfall) Permitted (m3/d)
Ascot 7.67 7.11 6.98 7.17 7.32 7.44 0 3% None
Billingbear 0.02 0.015 0.016 - - None
Bracknell 19.53 16.74 17.34 18.20 18.84 19.43 0 0.5% None
Easthampstead 1.86 1.32 1.50 1.69 1.68 1.68 0 10% Tertiary treatment
Phosphorus Sandhurst 13.00 6.82 6.89 7.04 7.12 6 45% tightening
Table 6-5: Wastewater Treatment Works Flow and Quality Consent Assessment - JBA Consulting Assessment
WwTW Permitted Headroom Assessment Maximum DWF Present day (greater of End of AMP6 End of AMP7 End of AMP8 End of AMP9 End of AMP10 (Ml/d) 2013-2015 or 2015 measured flow) DWF Headroom Total Headroom Total Headroom Total Headroom Total Headroom Total Headroom (Ml/d) % of DWF % of DWF % of DWF % of DWF % of DWF % of Permitted (Ml/d) Permitted (Ml/d) Permitted (Ml/d) Permitted (Ml/d) Permitted (Ml/d) Permitted
Ascot 7.667 8.173 -7% 8.239 -7% 8.412 -10% 8.592 -12% 8.677 -13% 8.677 -13% Billingbear 0.020 0.020 0% 0.020 0% 0.020 0% 0.020 0% 0.020 0% 0.020 0% Lane Bracknell 19.529 16.548 15% 19.092 2% 20.033 -3% 21.104 -8% 21.794 -12% 21.810 -12% Easthampstead 1.857 1.666 10% 1.666 10% 1.921 -3% 2.261 -22% 2.516 -35% 2.516 -35% Park Sandhurst 13.000 6.667 49% 7.476 42% 7.557 42% 7.663 41% 7.744 40% 7.746 40%
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 66 66
6.4.4 Conclusions • The assessment indicates that Ascot, Bracknell and Easthampstead Park WwTWs are all forecast to exceed their permitted dry weather flow as a result of planned growth during the plan period, and indeed that Ascot did exceed its permitted DWF in 2015. In the case of Bracknell WwTW, the future exceedance is as a result of planned growth in Bracknell Forest only. In the case of Ascot and Easthampstead Park, it is as a result of planned growth in both Bracknell Forest and in neighbouring authorities. It is therefore anticipated that these three WwTWs will require capacity upgrades during the plan period. • TWUL have given Bracknell an "amber" assessment, indicating that treatment upgrades will be required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should, working with Thames Water, investigate further the headroom capacity at Bracknell WwTW, which is forecast to exceed its flow permit capacity during AMP7 (2020-2025). • TWUL have given Easthampstead Park a "red" assessment, indicating that treatment upgrades will be required to serve proposed growth, and that major constraints have been identified. The nature of these constraints has not yet been stated. The RAG assessment for Ascot has been raised to a "red" as a result of the DWF permit exceedance in 2015. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should, working with Thames Water, investigate further the constraints on providing treatment capacity at Ascot and Easthampstead, or alternative solutions to treat elsewhere. • Sandhurst WwTW is forecast to have sufficient headroom capacity to accommodate additional flows as a result of planned growth in both Bracknell Forest and Hart District. • Billingbear WwTW is a very small works, operating at its flow capacity. There is no planned growth in this catchment, and no capacity for even minor windfall development, without a treatment works upgrade being required.
6.4.5 Recommendations Table 6-6 details the recommendations that have been found from the flow permit assessment. Table 6-6: Wastewater Treatment Works Permit Actions
Action Responsibility Timescale Consider the available WwTW capacity when phasing development going to the same WwTW. This is particularly the case for developments to be BFC Ongoing served by Ascot WwTW, until such time as there is sufficient available evidence that headroom capacity is not an issue. Provide Annual Monitoring Reports to Thames Water detailing projected housing growth in the BFC Ongoing Local Authority.
Thames Water to assess growth demands as part of their wastewater asset planning activities and BFC Ongoing feedback to BFC if concerns arise.
6.5 Scoping Water Quality Assessment
6.5.1 Introduction An increase in the discharge of effluent from Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) as a result of development and growth in the area in which they serve can lead to a negative impact on the quality of the receiving watercourse. Under the Water Framework Directive (WFD), a watercourse is not allowed to deteriorate from its current WFD classification (either as an overall watercourse or for individual elements assessed). It is Environment Agency (EA) policy to model the impact of increasing effluent volumes on the receiving watercourses. Where the scale of development is such that a deterioration is predicted, a
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 67 67
variation to the Environmental Permit (EP) may be required for the WwTW to improve the quality of the final effluent, so that the increased pollution load will not result in a deterioration in the water quality of the watercourse. This is known as "no deterioration" or "load standstill". The need to meet river quality targets is also taken into consideration when setting or varying a permit. The Environment Agency operational instructions on water quality planning and no-deterioration are currently being reviewed. Previous operational instructions55 (now withdrawn) set out a hierarchy for how the no-deterioration requirements of the WFD should be implemented on inland waters. The potential impact of development should be assessed in relation to the following objectives: • Could the development cause a greater than 10% deterioration in water quality? This objective is to ensure that all the environmental capacity is not taken up by one stage of development and there is sufficient capacity for future growth. • Could the development cause a deterioration in WFD class of any element assessed? This is a requirement of the Water Framework Directive to prevent a deterioration in class of individual contaminants. The "Weser Ruling"56 by the European Court of Justice in 2015 specified that individual projects should not be permitted where they may cause a deterioration of the status of a water body. If a water body is already at the lowest status ("bad"), any impairment of a quality element was considered to be a deterioration. Emerging practice is that a 3% limit of deterioration is applied. • Could the development alone prevent the receiving watercourse from reaching Good Ecological Status or Potential? Is GES possible with current technology or is GES technically possible after development with any potential WwTW upgrades.
6.5.2 Methodology The completion of a scoping water quality assessment is designed to determine if the questions listed in Section 6.2 can be answered using existing data and evidence or if there are knowledge gaps where further assessment is required to determine if the WwTW can support the growth proposed. This scoping water quality assessment collates the existing information on each WwTW and provides an initial assessment of the impacts of the current water quality situation and the distribution of proposed growth across the five WwTWs in Bracknell Forest. Because this scoping water quality assessment is based on available data, not on new modelling, it does not quantitatively assess the impacts of growth on water quality. It is likely, therefore, that a detailed assessment of water quality will be required at a later stage. SIMCAT is an open-source, semi-distributed hydrology and water quality model with the ability to study the impacts of growth on watercourses at catchment scale so cumulative impacts can be determined. This would be a suitable method of modelling and analysing the impact of increased effluent discharges on water quality in the receiving watercourses, assuming that an existing SIMCAT model is available for the catchment which the Environment Agency consider to be suitable for this use. In the absence of a suitable existing model, it is recommended that a site-by site assessment is conducted using the EA's River Quality Planning (RQP) toolkit.
6.5.3 Results
6.5.3.1 Ascot WwTW Ascot WwTW is located on the eastern edge of Bracknell, at The Warren off Bog Lane (Figure 6-8). The WwTW discharges into the Bull Brook (GB106039017670). This watercourse was given a Moderate Overall Waterbody Classification in Cycle 2 of 2015 Water Framework Directive (WFD). The WwTW discharges very close to the head of the watercourse, indicating that there will be very low potential dilution. Further details of the WwTW and receiving watercourse can be found in Table 6-7 and Appendix A.
55 Environment Agency (2012) Water Quality Planning: no deterioration and the Water Framework Directive. Accessed online at http://www.fwr.org/WQreg/Appendices/No_deterioration_and_the_WFD_50_12.pdf on 08/08/2017 56 European Court of Justice (2015) PRESS RELEASE No 74/15 Accessed online at: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2015-07/cp150074en.pdf on 08/08/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 68 68
Figure 6-8 Ascot WwTW Location and WFD Classification
Table 6-7: Water Framework Classifications for the Bull Brook
Overall Water The Bull Brook Dissolved Oxygen Ammonia Phosphate Body 2015 WFD Cycle 2 Moderate High Moderate Poor Classification
Objectives Moderate by 2015 Good by 2015 Good by 2027 Poor by 2015
Table 6-8 summarises the proposed growth impacting Ascot WwTW over the plan period. As it is proposed to construct around 1,594 dwellings with wastewater being treated and managed at Ascot WwTWs, this is a significant increase in the demand placed on the WwTWs. This increase in demand can also be seen in the headroom assessment. This level of development could have an impact on water quality in the Bull Brook and prevent WFD objectives being met. Table 6-8: Proposed Growth Impacting Ascot WwTW
Housing Growth Over the Plan Period Employment Growth Over the Plan Period (dwellings) (ha) Within Within Within Within Bracknell Neighbouring Total Bracknell Neighbouring Total Forest LPAs Forest LPAs
903 691 1,594 0 0 0
6.5.3.2 Bracknell WwTW Bracknell WwTW is located to the North of Bracknell and the B3034. The WwTW discharges into The Cut, located to the west of the treatment works. This watercourse has been assessed as having a Moderate Overall Waterbody Classification in Cycle 2 of the 2015 Water Framework Directive. The Cut is a small watercourse, indicating that there will be limited potential dilution. Further details of the WwTW and receiving watercourse can be found in Table 6-9 and Appendix A. The Warfield Neighbourhood Plan57 also states that "we are advised by the Environment Agency that both these
57 Warfield Parish Council (2017) Warfield Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2036. Pre-Submission Plan.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 69 69
watercourses are currently failing to reach good ecological status/potential under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and both are currently classified as having moderate potential. Developments within or adjacent to these watercourses should therefore not cause further deterioration and should seek to improve the water quality based on the recommendations of the Thames River Basin Management Plan. The policy has been amended to reflect this advice." Figure 6-9 Bracknell WwTW Location and WFD Classification
Table 6-9: Water Framework Classifications for the Cut (Binfield to River Thames confluence and Maidenhead Ditch)
The Cut Overall Water Body Dissolved Oxygen Ammonia Phosphate 2015 WFD Cycle 2 Moderate Moderate High Poor Classification
Objectives Moderate by 2015 Good by 2027 Good by 2015 Poor by 2015
Table 6-10 summarises the proposed growth impacting Bracknell WwTW over the plan period. It is proposed to construct up to 12,086 dwellings and 17,093 ha of employment development where Bracknell WwTW will treat these wastewater flows, this is a significant increase in the demand placed on the treatment works. This increase in demand can also be seen in the headroom assessment. The level of growth could have a large impact on water quality in The Cut and has the potential to lead to deteriorations in WFD classifications. Table 6-10: Proposed Growth Impacting Bracknell WwTW
Housing Growth Over the Plan Period Employment Growth Over the Plan Period (dwellings) (ha) Within Within Within Within Bracknell Neighbouring Total Bracknell Neighbouring Total Forest LPAs Forest LPAs
12,026 0 12,086 17,093 0 17,093
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 70 70
6.5.3.3 Easthampstead WwTW Easthampstead WwTW is located to the south west of Bracknell Forest on the western border with Wokingham. The WwTW discharges into the Emm Brook to the West (GB106039023130). The Emm Brook was classified as Poor during Cycle 2 of the 2015 Water Framework Directive. The Emm Brook is a small watercourse, indicating that there will be limited potential dilution. Further details of the WwTW and receiving watercourse can be found in Table 6-11 and Appendix A. Figure 6-10 Easthampstead WwTW Location and WFD Classification
Table 6-11: Water Framework Classifications for the Emm Brook
Emm Brook Overall Water Body Dissolved Oxygen Ammonia Phosphate 2015 WFD Cycle 2 Poor Moderate High Poor Classification Objectives Moderate by 2027 Good by 2027 Good by 2015 Poor by 2015
Table 6-12 summarises the proposed growth in the area managed by Easthampstead WwTW over the plan period. It is proposed to construct around 2,832 dwellings and 136 ha of employment development, where wastewater will be treated at Easthampstead. This is a significant increase in the demand placed on the treatment works which can also be seen in the headroom assessment. This level of growth could have an impact on water quality in the Emm Brook and caused deteriorations in WFD classifications. Table 6-12: Proposed Growth Impacting Easthampstead WwTW
Housing Growth Over the Plan Period Employment Growth Over the Plan Period (dwellings) (ha) Within Within Within Within Bracknell Neighbouring Total Bracknell Neighbouring Total Forest LPAs Forest LPAs
612 2,220 2,832 136 0 136
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 71 71
6.5.3.4 Sandhurst WwTW Sandhurst WwTW is located on the southern border between Bracknell Forest and Hart District (Figure 6-11). The WwTW discharges into the Blackwater (GB106039017290). This watercourse was given a Moderate Overall Waterbody Classification in Cycle 2 of the 2015 Water Framework Directive. Further details of the WwTW and receiving watercourse can be found in Table 6-13 and Appendix A. Figure 6-11 Sandhurst WwTW Location and WFD Classification
Table 6-13: Water Framework Classifications for the Blackwater (Hawley to Whitewater confluence at Bramshill)
Overall Water Biological Oxygen The Blackwater Ammonia Phosphate Body Demand 2015 WFD Cycle 2 Moderate High Moderate Poor Classification Moderate by Good by Objectives N/A Poor by 2015 2015 2027
Table 6-14 summarises the proposed growth impacting Sandhurst WwTW over the plan period. It is proposed to construct around 2,042 dwellings and 5,000 ha of employment development; wastewater will be treated at Sandhurst and discharged into the Blackwater. This is a significant increase in the demand placed on the treatment works. This level of growth could have an impact on water quality in the Blackwater. Table 6-14: Proposed Growth Impacting Sandhurst WwTW
Housing Growth Over the Plan Period Employment Growth Over the Plan Period (dwellings) (ha) Within Within Within Within Bracknell Neighbouring Total Bracknell Neighbouring Total Forest LPAs Forest LPAs 1,941 101 2,042 5,000 0 5,000 Note that the assessment of headroom capacity at Sandhurst WwTW in the combined Hart, Rushmoor, and Surrey Heath WCS assessment dated March 2017 assumed a total of 200 dwellings
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 72 72
within Hart will connect to Sandhurst WwTW. The phase 2 study should check this value and, if in doubt, use this higher figure for assessing headroom and water quality impact.
6.5.4 Billingbear WwTW Billingbear WwTW is located to the north west of Bracknell Forest, close to the boundary with Windsor and Maidenhead (Figure 6-12). The WwTW discharges into an unnamed watercourse to the west of the WwTW, a tributary of the Twyford Brook (GB106039023190), which itself discharges into the Loddon (GB106039023160). The Twyford Brook was classified as Bad in Cycle 2 of the 2015 WFD; the Loddon was classed as Moderate. The element leading to "bad" status in the Twyford Brook was invertebrates. A deterioration in water quality as a result of growth could lead to further deterioration of invertebrates, and hence even a small development in this catchment could potentially lead to further deterioration, which is not permissible in line with the Weser ruling (see section 6.5.2). Figure 6-12 Billingbear WwTW Location and WFD Classification
Table 6-15: Water Framework Classifications for the Twyford Brook and Loddon
Overall Twyford Dissolved Water Ammonia Phosphate Brook Oxygen Body 2015 WFD Bad Poor High Moderate Cycle 2 Status Good by Good by Good by Good by Objectives 2027 2027 2015 2027 Overall Loddon Water BOD Ammonia Phosphate Body 2015 WFD Moderate High High Moderate Cycle 2 Status Moderate Not Good by Moderate Objectives by 2015 Available 2015 by 2015
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 73 73
No growth is proposed in areas managed by Billingbear WwTW, which means that planned development within Bracknell Forest will not have an impact on water quality at Billingbear WwTW. No detailed modelling of the impacts of growth on water quality for this WwTW is required.
6.5.5 Priority substances and other EU-level dangerous substances
As well as the general chemical and physicochemical water quality elements (BOD, NH4, P etc.) addressed above, a watercourse can fail to meet GES due to exceeding permissible concentrations of hazardous substances. Currently 33 substances are defined as hazardous or priority hazardous substances, with others under review. Such substances may pose risks both to humans (when contained in drinking water) and to aquatic life and animals feeding in aquatic life. These substances are managed by a range of different approaches, including EU and international bans on manufacturing and use, targeted bans, selection of safer alternatives and end-of-pipe treatment solutions. There is considerable concern within the UK water industry that regulation of these substances by setting permit values which require their removal at wastewater treatment works will place a huge cost burden upon the industry and its customers, and that this approach would be out of keeping with the "polluter pays" principle. We also consider how the planning system might be used to manage priority substances: • Industrial sources – whilst the WCS covers potential employment sites, it doesn't consider the type of industry and therefore likely sources of priority substances are unknown. It is recommended that developers should discuss potential uses which may be sources of priority substances from planned industrial facilities at an early stage with the EA and, where they are seeking a trade effluent consent, with the sewerage undertaker. • Agricultural sources - There is limited scope for the planning system to change or regulate agricultural practices. • Surface water runoff sources - some priority substances e.g. heavy metals, are present in urban surface water runoff. It is recommended that future developments would manage these sources by using SuDS that provide water quality treatment, designed following the CIRIA SuDS Manual. • Domestic wastewater sources - some priority substances are found in domestic wastewater as a result of domestic cleaning chemicals, detergents, or materials used within the home. Whilst an increase in the population due to housing growth could increase the total volumes of such substances being discharged to the environment, it would seem more appropriate to be managing these substances through regulation at source, rather than through restricting housing growth through the planning system. No further analysis of priority substances will be undertaken as part of the Water Cycle Study.
6.5.6 Existing and ongoing water quality studies Water Quality is a cross-boundary issue, and the impacts of growth can be cumulative where wastewater treatment works receiving growth from several local authorities, discharge to a river system. The Environment Agency advised that, where several treatment works discharge into the same river system, it is their preference that the impacts are assessed using catchment scale modelling. The EA also confirmed that the latest available water quality model that they hold is the SIMCAT/SAGIS model for the Thames River Basin District, which is calibrated to a baseline of 2010-2012. No updates to this model are planned by the EA within the likely timescale of a stage 2 WCS for Bracknell Forest, and therefore an updated base model will need to be prepared by the Bracknell Forest phase 2 WCS. Neighbouring LPAs were contacted by Bracknell Forest Council to provide details on any water quality impact modelling that has been completed or is currently underway, a summary of responses can be found in Table 6-16.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 74 74
Table 6-16: Key Local Planning Authorities Responses
LPA Comment
Basingstoke and Full response: Deane Borough Council "Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council’s existing Water Cycle Study Phase 1 was completed in March 2007 and Phase 2 was completed in October 2009. There are no current plans to update this study in the short/ medium term.
For your information, I would like to highlight that water quality of the River Loddon was discussed at length during the examination of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan. In brief, the discussions were in relation to the issue of further development in and around Basingstoke and the impact this could have on the water quality of the River Loddon specifically as the Loddon catchment is currently failing to meet the good ecological status of the Water Framework Directive. A Statement of Common Ground between the council, Environment Agency and Thames Water was produced for the Local Plan Inspector – which can be viewed on the council’s website. As noted in the SoCG, the EA did undertake additional water quality modelling to assess the impact of development over the plan period. The additional modelling demonstrated that there should not be WFD deterioration from the current class to a lower one (i.e. poor to bad). The Local Plan includes a specific policy on water quality (EM6). The monitoring of policy EM6 will be included in our next Authority Monitoring Report which will be published at the end of the year.
I would also like to bring to your attention the current arrangements for monitoring of the River Loddon around the Basingstoke Sewage Treatment Works:
Flow gauges In terms of River Loddon flow gauges up stream of the Basingstoke Sewage Treatment Works (STW), a flow gauge has been operational at Pyotts Bridge since August 2016. This flow gauge is currently being gauged every month to accumulate enough gauging’s to enable the Environment Agency (EA) to give a flow rating for the section. The second flow gauge, which is located at Round Copse, should be operational during the spring 2017. I understand that ground works for this flow gauge have been completed but the instrumentation has yet to be deployed onto the site.
Sampling sites In addition to the flow gauges, the EA has sampling sites on all of the borough’s water courses including up and down stream of sewage treatment works (STW). These points are sampled once a month by the EA. Data for the sampling points is recorded by the EA as part of their monitoring remit, and is available from them on request or via their Datashare website.
The EA has very recently provided an interactive pdf map (where layers can be switched on and off) to the Planning Policy Team showing the following:
• Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2015 Classifications for each
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 75 75
LPA Comment
Water Body within Basingstoke & Deane Borough • Effluent flow sites in the borough (including the one at the Basingstoke STW) • Sampling sites in the borough
Please find attached a map supplied by the EA along with a separate document that explains the data shown on the map. Please note that the two flow gauge stations (upstream of the Basingstoke STW) are not shown on the map provided.
Enhanced ecological monitoring In addition, the EA is currently running an enhanced ecological monitoring programme on the River Loddon around Basingstoke. This includes enhanced monitoring of invertebrates, diatoms, macrophytes and fish. The EA confirmed that this frequency of monitoring is enhanced compared to the standard WFD monitoring due to the concern raised over the proposed growth at Basingstoke and the impact this might have on the ecology of the River Loddon downstream of the discharge. The EA has confirmed that this enhanced monitoring has been secured for the next 12 months.
Thames water monitoring Thames Water also monitors treated effluent into the River Loddon (downstream of the STW). The Basingstoke STW is part of a wider national trial, involving multiple water companies, looking at ways to reduce phosphate. The monitoring was originally due to finish in March but I am aware that Thames Water have reported that the Basingstoke STW trial has been delayed."
Guildford Borough "Our most recent water quality modelling did use SIMCAT, but only for Council The River Blackwater (related to Ash Vale) and for the parameters of ammonia and phosphate. AECOM will arrange for the model outputs for the Blackwater to be sent to JBA in due course. Our most important river catchment is the Wey so the majority of the WQA doesn't use SIMCAT data; I believe it uses the EA’s RQP model but would need to check that if you want to be sure.”" Hampshire County No comments to make Council Hart District Council See response from Rushmoor Borough Council
Royal Borough of No Response Windsor & Maidenhead Rushmoor Borough In May 2017, AECOM released the joint Hart, Rushmoor and Surrey Council Heath WCS58. In terms of water quality modelling, this assessment includes catchment scale SIMCAT modelling of the Blackwater into which most of the WwTW in these districts discharge. For standalone WwTWs, discharge modelling using the Environment Agency's RQP (River Quality Modelling) Tool was applied.
58 AECOM (May 2017) Hart, Rushmoor and Surry Heath Water Cycle Study. Accessed online at: http://www.rushmoor.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=17744&p=0 on: 13/06/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 76 76
LPA Comment
Surrey Country No Response Council Surrey Heath See response from Rushmoor Borough Council Borough Council Thames Valley No Response Berkshire LEP Wokingham No comment. Borough Council
6.5.7 Proposed Methodology for Detailed Water Quality Assessment It is proposed that detailed water quality modelling should be completed to quantitively assess the impact of growth on water quality in the receiving watercourses. The following approach is proposed for the four WwTWs that require further assessment due to the levels of growth proposed. For all water quality assessments, modelling should be based on updated, measured flow and pollutant concentrations for all WwTWs, river flow gauges and river water quality monitoring points. Sandhurst WwTW discharges into the Blackwater (Hawley to Whitewater confluence at Bramshill). This section of the Blackwater has already been modelled within the Hart, Rushmoor and Surrey Heath WCS. This SIMCAT model will be obtained (subject to availability and any licensing restrictions), updated with additional growth from Bracknell Forest and reassessed to look at the catchment scale impacts on water quality. Bracknell WwTW discharges into The Cut (Binfield to River Thames) and Ascot WwTW discharges to the Bull Brook, a tributary of The Cut. To assess the impacts of growth on water quality in these watercourses, which discharge directly into the River Thames, the Thames Simcat model will be requested and updated based on proposed growth in Bracknell to assess the impacts of growth at the catchment scale. Easthampstead WwTW is a standalone treatment works in terms of this study area, discharging to the Emm Brook, a tributary to the Loddon. Due to its isolated location, and being the only WwTW discharging to the Emm Brook, it is proposed to use a standalone statistical based model RQP (River Quality Planning) Tool to assess the impacts of growth on the Emm Brook in terms of Phosphate, Ammonia and Biochemical Oxygen Demand.
6.5.8 Summary This scoping water quality assessment provides an overview of the Wastewater Treatment Works in Bracknell Forest and the levels of proposed growth that could lead to an increased discharge of treatment effluent at each location and data already available on Water Framework Directive classifications and permit information. It is recommended that, to quantitatively assess the impacts of growth on water quality, the stage 2 outline WCS should include a detailed water quality modelling assessment. Table 6-17 concludes the initial headroom and water quality assessments for each WwTWs based on Environment Agency guidance questions for the completion of Water Cycle Studies at the Scoping stage.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 77 77
Table 6-17: Summary of Wastewater Flow and Water Quality Assessment Questions
Question Ascot WwTW Bracknell WwTW Billingbear WwTW Easthampstead WwTW Sandhurst WwTW Significant housing growth Significant housing and Significant housing and Significant housing and Will the proposed housing growth have a to be served by Ascot, employment growth, No growth proposed at some employment growth, employment growth, detrimental impact on water quality? Evidence detailed modelling detailed modelling Billingbear WwTW detailed modelling detailed modelling found in Section 6.5 required required required required Is there sufficient environmental capacity within Significant housing growth Significant growth could Significant growth could Significant growth could the receiving water environment to accommodate could lead to deterioration lead to deterioration in lead to deterioration in Billingbear discharges into lead to deterioration in the resulting increase in flow and pollutant loads in WFD Classifications WFD Class and WFD Class and small watercourse not WFD Class and from the Wastewater Treatment Works because and compromise the ability compromise the ability of compromise the ability of assessed in the WFD compromise achieving of the planned housing growth? Evidence in of the watercourse to the Emm Brook to achieve the Cut to achieve GES GES Section 6.5 achieve GES GES If not, are there alternative discharge locations No other suitable No suitable discharge Close proximity to the Cut, No alternative discharge No alternative discharge that will not cause a failure of water quality discharge location as at location due to lack of this has a higher water location. locations due to location. targets or cause a deterioration in water quality? the head of watercourse. proximity to alternatives quality, modelling required Is there an increased risk of discharge from storm water overflows causing an adverse water No active CSO Consents in BFC so risk is low quality impact? Evidence in Section 5.1.3 Will the sewerage undertaker need to apply to The WwTW is working The WwTW is working The WwTW is reasonably DWF estimations only The works has sufficient increase the levels of treated effluent that can be close to its permitted DWF very close to its permitted close to the permitted available to 2021.Close to capacity to accommodate discharged under the existing permits, to allow with only 3% of headroom DWF with 0.5% of head- DWF with 10% of head- DWF Permit. all growth. for future growth? Evidence found in Section 6.4 remaining by 2036. room remaining in 2036. room remaining in 2036. Will the quality standard on the environmental permit need to be tightened to meet existing or At this stage, this question cannot be answered for any of the WwTWs, it is recommended that a full Water Quality Assessment is completed utilising a future water quality standards because of the Simcat model to assess if environmental permits need to be tightened to meet existing or future water quality standards. proposed growth (e.g. Water Framework Directive (WFD)? Can the existing wastewater treatment networks cope with the increased wastewater the Thames Water currently have no concerns in terms of short term flows in Bracknell Forest. This Water Company is planning to complete sewerage proposed growth will generate? Evidence in network modelling soon to aid future planning and to identify upgrades to the network that may be required. Section 5.1 If new major infrastructure is required (wastewater treatment works, major pumping Thames Water currently have no concerns in terms of short term flows in Bracknell Forest. This Water Company is planning to complete sewerage mains or sewer mains) can they be provided and network modelling soon to aid future planning and to identify upgrades to the network that may be required. funded in time? Evidence in Section 5.1 Detailed WQA Detailed WQA Detailed WQA not Detailed WQA Detailed WQA Recommendations for Further Assessments recommended recommended required recommended recommended
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 78 78
6.6 Wastewater Treatment Works Odour Assessment Where new developments encroach upon an existing Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW), odour from that site may become a cause for nuisance and complaints from residents. Managing odour at WwTWs can add considerable capital and operational costs, particularly when retro-fitted to existing WwTWs. National Planning Policy Guidance recommends that plan-makers consider whether new development is appropriate near to sites used (or proposed) for water and wastewater infrastructure, due to the risk of odour nuisance.
6.6.1 Methodology Sewerage undertakers recommend that an odour assessment may be required if the site of a proposed development is close to a WwTW and is encroaching closer to the WwTW than existing urban areas. A GIS assessment was carried out to identify sites that the sewerage undertaker considers may be at risk from odour nuisance due to encroachment on an existing WwTW. For Thames Water, this is development sites less than 800m from the WwTW and encroaching closer to the WwTW than existing urbanised areas. If there are no existing houses close to a WwTW it is more likely that an odour assessment is needed. Another important aspect is the location of the site in respect to the WwTW. Historic wind direction records for sites around Bracknell indicate that the prevailing wind is from south southwest (Farnborough) to west southwest / southwest (Heathrow)59. A red / amber / green assessment was applied:
Site location is such that an Site is in an area with Site is unlikely to be impacted by odour impact assessment is confirmed WwTW odour odour from WwTW recommended issues
6.6.2 Data Collection The datasets used to assess the impact of odour from a WwTW were: • Site location in GIS format (provided by the BFC) • WwTW locations (provided by TW) • Site tracker spreadsheet (see Appendix B)
6.6.3 Results A list of sites where it is recommended that an odour assessment is undertaken is shown in Table 6-18 below. Table 6-18: Sites recommended for odour assessment
Direction of Site distance Site Ref WwTW the WwTW from WwTW Comments from site (m) Existing housing 85m West of WINK21 Ascot South west 660 WwTW and 270 m North Existing housing 85m West of WINK22 Ascot South west 80 WwTW and 270 m North Limited housing within 200 m south WAR5 Bracknell North 650 of WwTW
59 RenSMART website http://www.rensmart.com/Weather/WindArchive#monthlyLayer accessed on 11/04/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 79 79
Direction of Site distance Site Ref WwTW the WwTW from WwTW Comments from site (m) Isolated housing BRA3 Easthampstead West / North 10 200 m to west BRA4 Easthampstead North West 260
BRA1 Easthampstead North 410
BRA2 Easthampstead North 770
6.6.4 Conclusions The odour screening assessment concluded that seven sites may be at risk of experiencing odour due to their proximity to the existing WwTW. It is recommended that odour assessments be undertaken as part of the planning application process for these sites. It is the developer's responsibility to undertake an odour risk assessment. All other sites are unlikely to be impacted by odour from WwTWs. Odour assessments, where the screening assessment indicates that they are required, should be undertaken by site developers. No additional assessment of odour impact is required in the Stage 2 WCS. Table 6-19: Summary of odour impact assessment
Site Ref WwTW Assessment
WINK22 Ascot
WINK21 Ascot
WAR5 Bracknell Site location is such that an odour BRA3 Easthampstead impact assessment is recommended as part of the planning application process BRA4 Easthampstead
BRA1 Easthampstead
BRA2 Easthampstead
Site is unlikely to be impacted by odour All other sites from WwTW
6.6.5 Recommendations Table 6-20 provides a summary of actions relating to the wastewater treatment works odour assessment. Table 6-20: Wastewater Treatment Works Odour Actions
Action Responsibility Timescale
Consider odour risk in the sites identified to be less than 800m from BFC Ongoing a WwTW
Carry out an odour assessment for 'amber' assessed sites. Site Developers Ongoing
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 80 80
7 Flood Risk Management
7.1 Assessment of Additional Flood Risk from Increased WwTW Discharges
7.1.1 Introduction In catchments with a large planned growth in population and which discharge effluent to a small watercourse, the increase in the discharged effluent might have a negative effect on the risk of flooding. An assessment has been carried out to quantify such an effect.
7.1.2 Methodology The following process has been used to assess the potential increased risk of flooding due to extra flow reaching a specific WwTW: • Calculate the increase in DWF because of the planned growth; • Identify the point of discharge of these WwTWs; • At each outfall point, use the FEH CD-ROM v3.0 to extract the catchment descriptors; • Use ReFH60 method to calculate peak 1 in 30 (Q30) and 1 in 100 (Q100) year fluvial flows; • Calculate the additional foul flow as a percentage of the Q30 and Q100 flow
A red / amber / green score was applied to score the associated risk as follows:
Additional flow ≥5% of Q30. Additional flow ≥5% of Q100. Additional flow ≤5% of Q30. Low Moderate risk that increased High risk that increased risk that increased discharges will discharges will increase fluvial discharges will increase fluvial increase fluvial flood risk flood risk flood risk
The datasets used to assess the risk of flooding are the following: • Current and predicted future DWF for each WwTW • Location of WwTW outfalls • Catchment descriptors from FEH CD-ROM v3.061
7.1.3 Results Table 7-1 below shows the additional flow from the WwTW as a percentage of the Q30 and Q100 peak flow. This shows that the additional flows from the WwTWs post development, would have a negligible effect on the predicted peak flow events with return periods of 30 and 100 years. Table 7-1: Summary of DWF increase as a percentage of Q30 and Q100 peak flow
FEH FEH Additional Additional Flow Flow Stat Stat WwTW Average Flow increase increase Q30 Q100 DWF (Ml/d) (m3/s) % Q30 % Q100 (m3/s) (m3/s)
Ascot 0.91 1.2 0.504 0.0058 0.6% 0.5%
Bracknell 20.19 25.03 5.262 0.0609 0.3% 0.2%
Easthampstead 0.4 0.55 0.850 0.0098 2.5% 1.8% Sandhurst 18.84 23.19 1.079 0.0125 0.1% 0.1%
60 Note: ReFH2 was released in February 2015. This implements improvements which are mainly relevant to permeable and urbanised catchments. As the study catchments are not permeable or highly urbanised, and that the ReFH method is not being used to generate hydrographs in this case, ReFH1 has been used. 61 FEH CD-ROM v3.0 © NERC (CEH). © Crown copyright. © AA. 2009. All rights reserved.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 81 81
7.1.4 Conclusions The impact of increased effluent flows is unlikely to have a significant impact upon flood risk in the receiving watercourses.
7.1.5 Recommendations Table 7-2: Summary of Flood Risk Management Recommendations
Action Responsibility Timescale
Proposals to increase discharges to a watercourse may also require a flood risk activities environmental permit from During design of the EA (in the case of discharges to Main River), or a land TW WwTW upgrades drainage consent from the Lead Local Flood Authority (in the case of discharges to an Ordinary Watercourse).
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 82 82
8 Environmental Constraints and Opportunities
8.1 Sites with Environmental Designation Changes in wastewater discharges to watercourses passing through or close to environmentally sensitive sites have the potential to cause an adverse effect on these sites. Figure 8-1 shows the sites that exist in and around Bracknell Forest with environmental designations. Of particular interest to this WCS are WwTWs which discharge into a watercourse that subsequently passes through a site with an environmental designation.
Figure 8-1 Map of environmental designations and their proximity to watercourses
Table 8-1 shows potential sources of additional pollution from developments, and their pathways to environmentally sensitive sites (receptors). An assessment has been made of their likely impact on the designated sites.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 83 83
Table 8-1: Potential impact on environmentally designated sites from WwTWs
Distance Probable Source Pathway Receptor downstream Impact
Ascot WwTW Great Thrift Wood SSSI Bracknell WwTW The Cut 7 km Minor (SU871782) Billingbear WwTW
Easthampstead Lodge Wood SSSI The Loddon 10 km Minor WwTW (SU787736) The Lodge Wood SSSI Sandhurst WwTW Blackwater 21 km Negligible (SU787736) and Loddon The Sandford Mill SSSI Sandhurst WwTW Blackwater 22 km Negligible (SU779729) and Loddon
The Blackwater Valley SSSI 100 m Sandhurst WwTW Minor Blackwater (SU849604) (upstream)
The Bramshill SSSI Sandhurst WwTW 8 km Minor Blackwater (SU774596)
Sandhurst WwTW discharges into the Blackwater River, and has a SSSI 100 m away. However, discharge is downstream of the SSSI so it is expected this would have minor impact.
8.1.1 Suitable Accessible Natural Greenspaces (SANGs)62 The Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area (SPA) is a network of heathland sites designated in 2005 and providing significant habitat for internationally important bird species such as woodlark, nightjar and Dartford warbler. Natural England have advised that development within 5 km of the SPA for all new housing and within 7 km for larger developments may harm rare bird populations, so avoidance and mitigation measures are required. However, no new residential development may occur within 400 m because it cannot mitigate its impact on the SPA. Additional housing increases the number of visitors to the SPA, and causes harm through disturbance from walkers and dogs. To mitigate this, developers can use measures such as SANGs. This aims to provide alternative green space, and divert visitors away from the SPA reducing pressure on it.
8.1.2 Conclusions and recommendations Bracknell Forest and its surroundings contain some environmentally important sites identified by SSSI, SAC and SPA designations. When development is being considered for this area it is important that the potential to cause a range of adverse impacts are considered. More detailed environmental surveys and assessments may need to be required when development sites are being considered, to determine the acceptability of their development and to inform the requirement for mitigation measures. When considering areas for development, it should not be assumed that areas with few environmental features in close proximity are suitable for development. Likewise, sites with a greater number of environmental features in close proximity should not be assumed to be unsuitable for development, as constraints could be appropriately assessed. The potential for adverse impacts on the water environment is closely related to the presence and sensitivity of water features on, or in close proximity to development sites. Where such features exist, adequate protection measures should be implemented in the design of the development to ensure effective protection during both construction and operational phases. Such measures would include the provision of wide vegetated buffer zones adjacent to watercourses, to reduce the risk of contaminated runoff affecting river water quality and to promote aquatic biodiversity. The use of
62 Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Avoidance and Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document, Bracknell Forest Council 2012. Accessed online at: https://files.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/sites/bracknell/documents/thames-basin-heaths-spa-avoidance- and-mitigation-spd.pdf?geJrRJAHN0SNS4ZU3fJN9xC3WsGbRX05 on: 29/08/2017
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 84 84
SuDS systems would promote infiltration of surface runoff and contribute to groundwater recharge, whilst also offering potential biodiversity, flood risk and amenity benefits. Changes in waste water discharges to watercourses passing through or close to environmentally sensitive sites have the potential to cause an adverse effect on these sites. However, based on the distance between source and receptor, and the additional volume of waste water, the probable impact is minor or negligible in the case of Bracknell Forest. There are also a range of potential environmental opportunities that could be delivered through any development proposals. Opportunities include enhancement of existing ecological features, such as watercourses, field margins and trees, the provision of new biodiversity habitats, and the creation of new recreational and amenity areas. No additional assessments of impact upon designated sites are recommended for the Phase 2 Outline WCS.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 85 85
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 86 86
9 Climate Change Impact Assessment
9.1 Approach A qualitative assessment has been undertaken to assess the potential impacts of climate change on the assessments made in this water cycle study. This has been done using a matrix which considers both the potential impact of climate change on the assessment in question, and also the degree to which climate change has been considered in the information used to make the assessments contained within the WCS (see Table 9-1). The impacts have been assessed on a BFC area wide basis; the available climate models are generally insufficiently refined to draw different conclusions for different parts of Bracknell Forest, or doing so would require a degree of detail beyond the scope of this study. Table 9-1: Climate Change Pressures Scoring Matrix
Impact of pressure
Low Medium High Yes - quantitative
consideration Have climate change pressures Some been considered consideration but in the qualitative only assessment? Not considered
9.2 Results Table 9-2: Scoring of Climate Change Consequences for the Water Cycle Study
Have climate change Impact of Pressure (source of Assessment pressures been considered in RAG information) the assessment?
Water Yes - quantitative within WRMP High (1 and 2) resources and RMBP
Water supply Medium - some increased demand in Yes - qualitative consideration
infrastructure hot weather within WRMP
High - Intense summer rainfall and Wastewater No - not considered in TWUL higher winter rainfall increases flood Collection assessment risk
Medium - Increased winter flows and Wastewater No - not considered in TWUL more extreme weather events reduces treatment assessment flow headroom
WwTW Low No - not considered odour
Nutrients: High (1) Water quality No - not considered Sanitary determinands: Medium (1)
Flooding from increased Low No - not considered WwTW discharge (1) River Basin Management Plan Thames River Basin District (2) Affinity Water and South East Water, WRMPs 2014
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 87 87
9.3 Recommendations Table 9-3: Climate Change Actions
Action Responsibility Timescale
When undertaking detailed assessments of environmental or asset capacity, consider how the EA, TWUL, AW, SEW, BFC As required latest climate change guidance can be included. Take "no regrets" decisions in the design of developments which will contribute to mitigation and adaptation to climate change impacts. For example, BFC, Developers As required consider surface water exceedance pathways when designing the layout of developments.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 88 88
10 Summary and Recommendations
10.1 Water Cycle Study Summary The phase 1 scoping Water Cycle Study has been carried out in cooperation with the Environment Agency, Affinity Water, South East Water and Thames Water. The overall assessment is that no strategic-scale water or wastewater constraints on growth have been identified within Bracknell Forest, however some further assessments are recommended in a phase 2 outline study. A site- by-site summary of the results of the assessments undertaken is included in Appendix B. Development Scenarios and Policy Issues This Water Cycle Study is an assessment of the impacts of planned development within Bracknell Forest. The Draft SHELAA identified 82 sites from a "call for sites", in addition to a number already in the planning process and an estimated number through windfall. Sites based in neighbouring authority areas that may use infrastructure within Bracknell Forest are also taken into account. This Water Cycle Study is key evidence for deciding the final site allocations to meet growth needs within Bracknell Forest. Legal agreements under the Town and Country Planning Act Section 106 agreement, and Community Infrastructure Levy agreements are not intended to be used to obtain funding for water or wastewater infrastructure. It is not therefore necessary for BFC to identify requirements for developers to contribute towards the cost of upgrades in its Local Plan. The Water Industry Act sets out arrangements for connections to public sewers and water supply networks, and developers should ensure that they engage at an early stage with Affinity Water, South East Water and Thames Water to ensure that site specific capacity checks can be undertaken, and where necessary, additional infrastructure is constructed to accommodate the development. Where permitted, Affinity Water, South East Water and Thames Water may seek developer contributions towards infrastructure upgrades. Upgrades to water resources and wastewater treatment works are funded through the company's business plans. Water Resources The administrative area of Bracknell Forest Council is located within the Environment Agency Abstraction Licensing Strategies (ALS) for the Thames and the Loddon. Both ALS have restricted water available for licensing and all sites have been considered under serious water stress by the EA. The two Water Resource Management Plans (WRMPs) demonstrate the pressures on water resources in the Affinity Water and South East Water supply zones with increasing demand, population growth, resource uncertainty, the impacts of climate change and the need to reduce some abstractions to reduce their impacts on the environment. The latest DCLG forecast for household growth within Affinity Water's Water Resource Zone 6 - WRZ6 (29%) is significantly higher than allowed for in the WRMP (20%). However, Affinity's analysis of recent household growth indicates that it has been lower than DCLG forecasts. There is sufficient time, within the water resource management planning process, for changes in demand as a result of household growth to be identified and addressed through supply-side or demand management measures. The latest DCLG forecast for household growth within South East Water's WRZ4 (23%) is slightly lower than allowed for in the WRMP (27%). Therefore, the WRMP is based on a robust estimate of household growth. Both companies, along with other water companies in South East England, are co-operating on developing population and household forecasts for the next WRMP in 2019. Whilst neither water company has relied on new homes being more water-efficient than existing metered homes, the opportunity, through the planning system, to ensure that new homes do meet the higher standard of 110l/person/day, at nominal additional cost to the developer, would be in line with general principals of sustainable development, and reducing energy consumed in the treatment and supply of water. The overall RAG assessment for Bracknell Forest’s water resources is green, on the basis that there is sufficient time to address the supply demand issues identified in the next WRMP. No
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 89 89
further assessment of water resources is recommended for the Phase 2 Outline Water Cycle Study. Water Supply Infrastructure All sites within Winkfield parish, plus site WAR17 within Warfield parish, would be served by Affinity Water. The additional demand of these developments would lead to unacceptable reductions in pressure during periods of peak demand, and therefore infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. No additional assessments are required within the Affinity Water supply area in the phase 2 outline WCS. All sites within the Binfield, Bracknell Town, Crowthorne, Sandhurst parishes and the majority of Warfield parish would be served by South East Water who have confirmed that they can provide supply to all of the sites proposed in their area. No additional assessments are required within the South East Water supply area in the phase 2 outline WCS. Wastewater Collection and Treatment The TW RAG assessment prepared for this scoping stage only considered clusters 1 to 6. The assessment indicates that, for the majority of these clusters, infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. The exceptions are cluster 3 (where there is adequate foul sewerage capacity) and cluster 5, which TW have given a red assessment, indicating that infrastructure upgrades are required to serve proposed growth, and significant constraints have been identified. No assessment has been made for sites not located with clusters 1 to 6 at this scoping stage. Thames Water are preparing a growth study including modelling to provide a more detailed assessment of how growth will be accommodated. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should revisit this assessment, once the ongoing growth study being prepared for Thames Water is complete. This should include all clusters and stand-alone sites. Sewerage Undertakers have a duty under Section 94 of the Water Industry Act 1991 to provide sewerage and treat wastewater arising from new domestic development. Except where strategic upgrades are required to serve very large or multiple developments, infrastructure upgrades are usually only implemented following an application for a connection, adoption, or requisition from a developer. Early developer engagement with water companies is therefore essential to ensure that sewerage capacity can be provided without delaying development. Thames Water's preferred method of surface water disposal is using a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) discharging to ground or open watercourses, with connection to the sewerage system seen as the last option. Bracknell is, however, predominantly situated on clay and therefore infiltration is unviable across most of the borough, meaning watercourses or public sewers are the only viable means of draining a site. Wastewater Treatment Works Flow Permit Assessment The assessment indicates that Ascot, Bracknell and Easthampstead Park WwTWs are all forecast to exceed their permitted dry weather flow as a result of planned growth during the plan period, and indeed that Ascot did exceed its permitted DWF in 2015. In the case of Bracknell WwTW, the future exceedance is as a result of planned growth in Bracknell Forest only. In the case of Ascot and Easthampstead Park, it is as a result of planned growth in both Bracknell Forest and in neighbouring authorities. It is therefore anticipated that these three WwTWs will require capacity upgrades during the plan period. TWUL have given Bracknell an "amber" assessment, indicating that treatment upgrades will be required to serve proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have been identified. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should, working with Thames Water, investigate further the headroom capacity at Bracknell WwTW, which is forecast to exceed its flow permit capacity during AMP7 (2020-2025). TWUL have given Easthampstead Park a "red" assessment, indicating that treatment upgrades will be required to serve proposed growth, and that major constraints have been identified. The nature of these constraints has not yet been stated. TWUL gave Ascot an "amber" assessment, but this has been raised to a "red" as a result of the DWF permit exceedance in 2015. The Phase 2 Outline
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 90 90
WCS should, working with Thames Water, investigate further the constraints on providing treatment capacity at Ascot and Easthampstead, or alternative solutions to treat elsewhere. Sandhurst WwTW is forecast to have sufficient headroom capacity to accommodate additional flows as a result of planned growth in both Bracknell Forest and Hart District. Billingbear WwTW is a very small works, operating at its flow capacity. There is no planned growth in this catchment, and no capacity for even minor windfall development, without a treatment works upgrade being required. Water Quality Impact Assessment Five WwTW were identified serving Bracknell Forest and neighbouring LPAs and a qualitative assessment was carried out on the likely effect of proposed development on water quality. It was found that, Ascot, Bracknell, Easthampstead Park and Sandhurst had the potential to experience a deterioration in WFD classification in nearby watercourses. To quantitatively assess the impacts of growth on water quality, a detailed water quality modelling assessment is required. This should take growth in neighbouring authorities into account and, where appropriate SIMCAT water quality models already exist, should be undertaken on a river sub-catchment scale, in order to assess the cumulative impact of growth within several treatment works catchments. The Phase 2 Outline WCS should include water quality impact modelling of growth at Ascot, Bracknell, Easthampstead Park and Sandhurst WwTWs. Wastewater Treatment Works Odour Assessment An odour screening assessment was completed to identify sites that are in close proximity to existing WwTWs where odour may be a cause of nuisance and complaints. Results concluded that seven sites may be at risk of experiencing odour due to their proximity to existing WwTWs, and a further assessment should be conducted. All other sites are unlikely to be impacted by odour from WwTW. Odour assessments, where the screening assessment indicates that they are required, should be undertaken by site developers. No additional assessment of odour impact is required in the Stage 2 WCS. Flood Risk A detailed assessment of flood risk can be found within the Bracknell Forest Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, which is to be published imminently. An assessment was carried out to determine whether increased discharges of treated effluent from each WwTW due to the additional development within Bracknell Forest could lead to an increase in fluvial flood risk from the receiving watercourse. This assessment was carried out at all the WwTW that will receive additional flows from the identified development sites, and results showed that the impact of increased effluent flows is not predicted to have a significant impact upon flood risk in any of the receiving watercourses. No additional assessment of flood risk from wastewater effluent discharges is required in the Stage 2 WCS. Environmental Constraints and Opportunities Data from the Environment Open data from the EA were used to create a map showing sites with environmental designations within Bracknell Forest, in order to identify sites likely to be impacted by additional discharge from WwTWs. The map should be used in conjunction with Sustainability Appraisals (SA) and evidence studies where these are available. No additional assessments of impact upon designated sites are recommended for the Phase 2 Outline WCS. Climate Change A qualitative assessment has been undertaken to assess the potential impacts of climate change on the assessments made within this water cycle study. The assessment used a matrix which considers both the potential impact of climate change on the assessment in question, and the degree to which climate change has been considered in the information used to make the assessments contained within the WCS.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 91 91
The capacity of the sewerage system and the water quality of receiving water bodies stand out as two elements of the assessment where the consequences of climate change are expected to be high but no account has been made of climate impacts in the assessment. Where feasible, these should be taken into account in the additional assessment included within the Phase 2 WCS.
10.2 Timescales for Implementing Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Upgrades Where it is identified that potential growth may exceed the existing capacity of the water and wastewater systems, further work will be required at stage 2 to identify what solutions may be implemented to address this. The timescale required to implement any specific infrastructure upgrade will depend on many site-specific factors, including but not limited to the scale of works, engineering complexity, planning and environmental constraints, negotiation of land purchase, access and wayleave, ground conditions and traffic conditions. It is beyond the scope of this water cycle study to assess the timescales required to make individual infrastructure upgrades, however, Table 10-1, developed with advice from water companies, provides indicative timescales for different types and sizes of upgrade: Table 10-1: Indicative timescales for implementing water infrastructure upgrades
Trigger for water Indicative project timescales for infrastructure Infrastructure company to assess upgrades or other interventions type requirements and develop plans Minor Major Demand management Publication of LPA Local New strategic asset e.g. Water measures, Plans and associated water reuse plant, resources updates minor new resource e.g. reservoir: 5-20 years borehole: 3-5 years
Pre-development New supply mains, Localised supply pipe boosters, service Water supply enquiries upgrades: 1-2 years reservoirs, treatment Planning applications works 3-5 years
Pre-development Minor upgrade of existing Major upgrade or new Wastewater enquiries treatment works: 2-4 treatment works 3-5 treatment Planning applications years years
Pre-development New collector sewers or Localised sewerage Sewerage enquiries other strategic assets: 3- upgrades: 1-3 years Planning applications 5 years As is emphasised throughout this study, early developer engagement with water companies is essential to ensure that water and wastewater providers have adequate time to provide infrastructure upgrades required to accommodate growth.
10.3 Safeguarding of Sites The three water and wastewater utilities, Affinity Water, South East Water and Thames Water were asked whether there are any sites within Bracknell Forest which they would seek to have safeguarded from further development in the Local Plan, in order to protect the site for potential future strategic water and wastewater assets. No sites have been identified as requiring safeguarding at this stage.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 92 92
10.4 Recommendations Table 10-2: All recommendations
Aspect Action Responsibility Timescale
Continue to regularly review forecast and actual household growth across the supply region through WRMP Annual Update reports, Affinity Water and where significant change is predicted, South East Ongoing engage with Local Planning Authorities. Take Water the latest growth forecasts into account in the emerging 2019 WRMP. BFC and other Provide yearly profiles of projected housing LPAs in the growth to water companies to inform the Affinity WRZ6 Ongoing WRMP and SE Water WRZ4. Water Use planning policy to require the resources 110l/person/day water consumption target permitted by National Planning Policy In Guidance in water-stressed areas, and use the BFC Comprehensive BREEAM standard to require percentage Local Plan improvement over baseline building water consumption of at least 12.5%. Water companies should advise BFC of any strategic water resource infrastructure developments within the council's boundary, Affinity Water In where these may require safeguarding of land South East Comprehensive to prevent other types of development Water Local Plan occurring. At present, none have been identified. Undertake technical studies to understand options to provide sufficient bulk and local South East Ongoing transfer capacity and communicate results with Water BFC. Water supply Developers should seek early consultation with Developers Affinity Water and South East Water to ensure Affinity Water adequate time is available to provide local Ongoing distribution mains upgrades to meet additional South East demand. Water
Take into account wastewater infrastructure BFC constraints in phasing development in Ongoing partnership with Thames Water Thames Water Wastewater collection Following completion of Thames Water's ongoing growth study, an outline Water Cycle BFC Study should be prepared, which should 2017 include an assessment of wastewater collection Thames Water system capacity.
Thames Water and developers will be expected to work closely and early in the planning promotion process to develop an outline Drainage Strategy for sites. The Outline Drainage strategy should set out the following: TW and What – What is required to serve the site Ongoing Developers Where – Where are the assets / upgrades to be located When – When are the assets to be delivered (phasing) Which – Which delivery route is the developer
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 93 93
Aspect Action Responsibility Timescale going to use s104 s98 s106 etc. The Outline Drainage Strategy should be submitted as part of the planning application submission, and where required, used as a basis for a drainage planning condition to be set.
Developers will be expected to demonstrate to the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) that Developers surface water from a site will be disposed using Ongoing a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) with LLFA connection to sewer seen as the last option.
Consider the available WwTW capacity when phasing development going to the same WwTW. This is particularly the case for developments to be served by Ascot WwTW, BFC Ongoing until such time as there is sufficient available evidence that headroom capacity is not an issue. Wastewater treatment Provide Annual Monitoring Reports to Thames headroom Water detailing projected housing growth in the BFC Ongoing Local Authority.
Thames Water to assess growth demands as part of their wastewater asset planning BFC Ongoing activities and feedback to BFC if concerns arise.
BFC should consider the available Water Local Plan environmental capacity at each settlement BFC quality preparation when assigning draft site allocations.
Consider odour risk in the sites identified to be BFC Ongoing Wastewater less than 800m from a WwTW treatment Carry out an odour assessment for 'amber' odour Site Developers Ongoing assessed sites. Proposals to increase discharges to a Wastewater watercourse may also require a flood risk treatment activities environmental permit from the EA (in During design flood risk the case of discharges to Main River), or a land TW of WwTW from drainage consent from the Lead Local Flood upgrades increased Authority (in the case of discharges to an effluent Ordinary Watercourse). When undertaking detailed assessments of environmental or asset capacity, consider how EA, TWUL, AW, As required the latest climate change guidance can be SEW, BFC included. Climate Take "no regrets" decisions in the design of change developments which will contribute to mitigation and adaptation to climate change impacts. For BFC, As required example, consider surface water exceedance Developers pathways when designing the layout of developments.
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 94 94
Appendices A Appendix - Wastewater Treatment Works Permit Summary
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 I
Table A - 1: Ascot WwTW Permit Information
Solids: Permit BOD: 5 day ATU suspended at DWF Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N Iron Aluminium Phosphorus COD as O BOD ATU Number 2 105
CTCR. 10 mg/l (95), 50 4000 ug/l 4000 ug/l 125 mg/l 25 mg/l 30 mg/l (95) 7667 m3/d 5 mg/l (95), 20 max 2 mg/l absolute 2048 mg/l max max max absolute absolute
Table A - 2: Bracknell WwTW Permit Information
Solids: Permit BOD: 5 day ATU suspended at DWF Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N Iron Aluminium Phosphorus COD as O BOD ATU Number 2 105
CTCR. 18 mg/l (95), 54 May-October 2 mg/l (95), 12 max; 4000 ug/l 4000 ug/l 125 mg/l 25 mg/l 30 mg/l (95) 19529 m3/d 2 mg/l absolute 1205 mg/l max November-April 2mg/l, 20 max max max absolute absolute
Table A - 3: Easthampstead WwTW Permit Information
Permit Solids: suspended at Ammoniacal BOD: 5 day ATU DWF Iron Aluminium Phosphorus COD as O BOD ATU Number 105 Nitrogen as N 2
CNTD.0 10 mg/l (95), 50 mg/l 10 mg/l (95), 125 mg/l 25 mg/l 15 mg/l (95) 1857 m3/d N/A N/A N/A 043 max 37 max absolute absolute
Table A - 4: Sandhurst WwTW Permit Information
Solids: Permit BOD: 5 day Cadmium Ammoniacal suspended at DWF Cadmium Iron Aluminium Phosphorus COD as O BOD ATU Number ATU Total Load Nitrogen as N 2 105
CNTD. 9 mg/l (95), 13000 10 ug/l 5 mg/l (95), 20 4000 4000 ug/l 2 mg/l 125 mg/l 25 mg/l 20 mg/l (95) 48 kg/d max 0029 50 mg/l max m3/d max max ug/l max max absolute absolute absolute
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 II II
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 III III
B Appendix - Sites under consideration
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 IV
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 V
Water Resources RAG descriptions Water Supply RAG descriptions WwTW Flow Capacity RAG descriptions Foul Sewerage RAG descriptions Surface Water Network RAG descriptions Odour Screening RAG descriptions Effluent flood risk RAG descriptions Adopted WRMP has planned for the increase in Additional flow ≤5% of Q30. Low risk that Site is unlikely to be impacted by odour from demand, or sufficient time to address supply Capacity available to serve the proposed growth Capacity available to serve the proposed growth Capacity available to serve the proposed growth Capacity available to serve the proposed growth increased discharges will increase fluvial flood WwTW demand issues in the next WRMP. risk. Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades Insufficient evidence in adopted WRMP to Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades are required to serve Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades are required to serve Additional flow ≥5% of Q30. Moderate risk that are required to serve proposed growth, but no are required to serve proposed growth, but no Site location is such that an odour impact confirm that the planned increase in demand proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this proposed growth, but no significant constraints to the provision of this increased discharges will increase fluvial flood significant constraints to the provision of this significant constraints to the provision of this assessment is recommended can be met infrastructure have been identified . infrastructure have been identified . risk. infrastructure have been identified . infrastructure have been identified . Adopted WRMP does not take into consideration Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be Additional flow ≥5% of Q100. High risk that Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be required to serve Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be required to serve Site is in an area with confirmed WwTW odour the planned increase in demand. Additional required to serve proposed growth. Major required to serve proposed growth. Major increased discharges will increase fluvial flood proposed growth. Major constraints have been identified. proposed growth. Major constraints have been identified. issues. water resources may be required. constraints have been identified. constraints have been identified. risk.
Site information Profiling by AMP Period Water Supply Wastewater Flood risk Check on Potential AMP5 (2010- AMP6 (2015- AMP7 (2020- AMP8 (2025- AMP9 (2030- AMP10 (2035- Per capita Average Per capita Percentage of Wastewater Potential AMP5 (2010-15) AMP6 (2015-20) AMP7 (2020-25) AMP8 (2025-30) AMP9 (2030-35) AMP10 (2035-40) percentage Company Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Foul Sewerage Surface Water In study housing Developability 15) 20) 25) 30) 35) 40) Water Resource domestic occupancy employment Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Water Water Supply water used Wastewater Demand by end Average Foul Sewers for Adoption WwTW Flow Odour Screening Effluent discharge Effluent discharge flood risk Site Code Cluster Local Planning Authority Parish / Settlement Location Source Locational Status PDL Status Status Site Area (Ha) Current Use Proposed Use employment profiled Water Company Demand (Ml/d) Water Resources Comments Water Supply Networks Comments Treating WwTW Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end WwTW Flow Capacity Comments Sewerage Undertaker Sewerage catchment Network Foul Sewerage Network Capacity Comments Network Surface Water Network Capacity Comments Odour screening comments area? number (within next X years) Zone consumption (persons per consumption of AMP5 (Ml/d) of AMP6 (Ml/d) of AMP7 (Ml/d) of AMP8 (Ml/d) of AMP9 (Ml/d) of AMP10 (Ml/d) Resources RAG Networks RAG returned to Demand (Ml/d) of AMP10 Flow (m3/s) Design Foul Flow (m3/s) Capacity RAG RAG flood risk RAG Comments 2 Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage (should be Wastewater of AMP5 (Ml/d) of AMP6 (Ml/d) of AMP7 (Ml/d) of AMP8 (Ml/d) of AMP9 (Ml/d) Capacity RAG capacity (units) (m ) Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings (m3/p/d) household) (m3/p/d) sewer (Ml/d) 100%) BIN1 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land north of Tilehurst Lane and east of Terrace Road North Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 4.92 Greenfield Housing 98 6 0 50% 49 50% 49 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.030 0.000 0.015 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.029 0.000 0.014 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.00034 0.00454 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN10 1 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Popes Manor, Murrell Hill Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 8.44 Greenfield Mixed 20 465 6-15 N/A N/A 30% N/A 40% N/A 30% N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.053 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.037 0.053 0.053 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.035 0.050 0.050 0.00058 Manual Calc Required Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green BIN11 1 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Popes Farm, Murrell Hill Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.90 Greenfield Housing 59 6-15 0 0 30% 18 40% 24 30% 18 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.013 0.018 0.018 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.012 0.017 0.017 0.00020 0.00273 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green BIN12 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Eastern Field, land south of London Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.31 Greenfield Housing 9 6-15 0 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.00003 0.00042 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN13 N Bracknell Forest Council (partially within Wokingham) Yes Binfield Western Field, land south of London Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Rejected 0.79 Greenfield Housing 0 6-15 0 0 30% 0 40% 0 30% 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN14 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land at Bigwood, Peacock Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.40 Greenfield Employment 0 480 6-15 N/A N/A 30% N/A 40% N/A 30% N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.048 0.000 0.000 0.014 0.034 0.048 0.048 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.046 0.000 0.000 0.014 0.032 0.046 0.046 0.00053 0.00028 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN15 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Popeswood Lodge, Popeswood Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.62 Greenfield Housing 7 6-15 0 0 30% 2 40% 3 30% 2 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.00002 0.00032 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN2 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land north of Ryslip Kennels (west of Church Lane) Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.84 Greenfield Housing 19 6-15 0 0 30% 6 40% 8 30% 6 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.006 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.006 0.00007 0.00088 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN3 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land north of Tilehurst Lane and west of Church Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Committed 3.56 Greenfield Housing 68 6-15 0 0 30% 20 40% 27 30% 20 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.015 0.021 0.021 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.014 0.020 0.020 0.00023 0.00315 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green Housing development treated Housing development treated Housing development treated as additional to current as additional to current as additional to current BIN4 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Wyevale Garden Centre, Forest Road Draft SHELAA Countryside PDL Under consideration 1.87 Employment Housing 35 6-15 0 0 30% 11 40% 14 30% 11 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.008 0.011 0.011 Green discharge. In reality it will Green discharge. In reality it will TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 0.00012 0.00162 Amber discharge. In reality it will TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green replace current discharge replace current discharge replace current discharge (currently a graden centre) (currently a graden centre) (currently a graden centre) BIN5 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land south of Forest Road and east of Cheney Close Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.85 Greenfield Housing 50 6-15 0 0 30% 15 40% 20 30% 15 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.011 0.016 0.016 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.010 0.015 0.015 0.00017 0.00231 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN6 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land south of Emmets Park and east of Cressex Close Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.57 Greenfield Housing 42 6-15 0 0 30% 13 40% 17 30% 13 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.009 0.013 0.013 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.009 0.012 0.012 0.00014 0.00194 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BIN7 1 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land to south of Foxley Lane and west of Whitehouse Farm Cottage, Murrell Hill Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.29 Greenfield Housing 6 6-15 0 0 30% 2 40% 2 30% 2 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.00002 0.00028 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green BIN8 1 Bracknell Forest Council (partially within Wokingham) Yes Binfield Land south of Foxley Lane and west of Murrell Hill Lane (Foxley Fields) Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 41.59 Greenfield Housing 540 6-15 0 0 30% 162 40% 216 30% 162 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.168 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.118 0.168 0.168 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.160 0.000 0.000 0.048 0.112 0.160 0.160 0.00185 0.02500 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green BIN9 1 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land at Murrell Hill Grange, Murrell Hill Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 18.27 Greenfield Housing 215 6-15 0 0 30% 65 40% 86 30% 65 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.047 0.067 0.067 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.064 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.044 0.064 0.064 0.00074 0.00995 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green BRA1 2 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Land at Parkview Farm, Old Wokingham Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 38.38 Greenfield Housing 605 6-15 0 0 30% 182 40% 242 30% 182 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.188 0.000 0.000 0.056 0.132 0.188 0.188 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.179 0.000 0.000 0.054 0.125 0.179 0.179 0.00207 0.02801 Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Amber Green BRA10 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Gowring House, Market Street Draft SHELAA Settlement PDL Committed 0.09 Mixed Housing 12 1-5 0 50% 6 50% 6 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00004 0.00056 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BRA11 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Bus Depot (Coldborough House), Market Street Draft SHELAA Settlement PDL Under consideration 0.61 Employment Housing 236 6-15 0 0 30% 71 40% 94 30% 71 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.073 0.000 0.000 0.022 0.051 0.073 0.073 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.070 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.049 0.070 0.070 0.00081 0.01093 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BRA2 2 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Easthampstead Park Conference Centre, Old Wokingham Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 22.79 Greenfield Housing 114 6-15 0 0 30% 34 40% 46 30% 34 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.025 0.035 0.035 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.034 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.024 0.034 0.034 0.00039 0.00528 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Amber Green BRA3 3 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town The Hideout, Old Wokingham Road (West Road) Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 22.66 Greenfield Housing 264 6-15 0 0 30% 79 40% 106 30% 79 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.082 0.000 0.000 0.025 0.058 0.082 0.082 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.078 0.000 0.000 0.023 0.055 0.078 0.078 0.00090 0.01222 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Amber Green BRA4 3 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Beaufont Park, Nine Mile Ride (South Road) Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 34.24 Greenfield Housing 258 6-15 0 0 30% 77 40% 103 30% 77 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.080 0.000 0.000 0.024 0.056 0.080 0.080 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.076 0.000 0.000 0.023 0.053 0.076 0.076 0.00088 0.01194 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Amber Green BRA5 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Pyramid House, Easthampstead Road Draft SHELAA Settlement PDL Under consideration 0.27 Employment Housing 33 6-15 0 0 30% 10 40% 13 30% 10 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 0.00011 0.00153 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BRA6 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Bracknell and Wokingham College, Wick Hill, Sandy Lane Draft SHELAA Settlement PDL Under consideration 1.17 Employment Housing 67 6-15 0 0 30% 20 40% 27 30% 20 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.015 0.021 0.021 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.014 0.020 0.020 0.00023 0.00310 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BRA7 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Town Square, The Ring (comprising Easthampstead House, Bracknell Library, Magistrates Court and Police Station) Draft SHELAA Settlement PDL Under consideration 1.16 Employment Housing 120 6-15 0 0 30% 36 40% 48 30% 36 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.026 0.037 0.037 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.025 0.035 0.035 0.00041 0.00556 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BRA8 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Land east of Old Toll Gate Close (land at Allsmoor Lane) Draft SHELAA Settlement Greenfield Rejected 0.50 Greenfield Housing 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green BRA9 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Alston House, Market Street (former Smart MOT) Draft SHELAA Settlement PDL Committed 0.07 Employment Mixed 19 1148 1-5 N/A 50% N/A 50% N/A N/A N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.121 0.000 0.060 0.121 0.121 0.121 0.121 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.115 0.000 0.057 0.115 0.115 0.115 0.115 0.00133 Manual Calc Required Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green CROW1 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Crowthorne 1-9 High Street Draft SHELAA Settlement PDL Committed 0.14 Mixed Mixed 6 136 6-15 N/A N/A 30% N/A 40% N/A 30% N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.011 0.015 0.015 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.010 0.015 0.015 0.00017 Manual Calc Required Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green SAND1 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Sandhurst Town Silverdene, Ambarrow Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Rejected 2.95 Greenfield Housing 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green SAND2 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Sandhurst Town Land to south of Sandhurst Lodge, Wokingham Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.15 Greenfield Housing 7 6-15 0 0 30% 2 40% 3 30% 2 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.00002 0.00032 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green SAND3 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Sandhurst Town Land south of Ambarrow Lane, west of Wokingham Road, and east of Lower Sandhurst Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 30.30 Greenfield Housing 530 6-15 0 0 30% 159 40% 212 30% 159 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.165 0.000 0.000 0.049 0.115 0.165 0.165 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.157 0.000 0.000 0.047 0.110 0.157 0.157 0.00181 0.02454 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green SAND4 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Sandhurst Town Land south of High Street and east of Yateley Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Rejected 2.40 Greenfield Housing 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green SAND5 N Bracknell Forest Council (partially within Wokingham) Yes Sandhurst Town Land east of Wokingham Road, and south of Duke's Ride (Derby Field) Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 8.88 Greenfield Housing 214 6-15 0 0 30% 64 40% 86 30% 64 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.047 0.067 0.067 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.044 0.063 0.063 0.00073 0.00991 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR10 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land north of Newhurst Gardens Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 4.43 Greenfield Housing 72 6-15 0 0 30% 22 40% 29 30% 22 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.022 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.016 0.022 0.022 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.015 0.021 0.021 0.00025 0.00333 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR11 4 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land at North Lodge Farm, Forest Road, Hayley Green Draft SHELAA Countryside PDL Under consideration 0.96 Mixed Housing 13 6-15 0 0 30% 4 40% 5 30% 4 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.00004 0.00060 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WAR12 4 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Brookfield Farm, Bracknell Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 4.13 Greenfield Housing 85 6-15 0 0 30% 26 40% 34 30% 26 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.019 0.026 0.026 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.025 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.018 0.025 0.025 0.00029 0.00394 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WAR13 4 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land at Sunset Farm, Hayley Green Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 5.71 Greenfield Housing 120 6-15 0 0 30% 36 40% 48 30% 36 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.026 0.037 0.037 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.025 0.035 0.035 0.00041 0.00556 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WAR14 4 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Meadowbrook, Montessori pre-school, Bracknell Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.80 Greenfield Housing 15 6-15 0 0 30% 5 40% 6 30% 5 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.005 0.005 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00069 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WAR15 4 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land east of Meadowbrook and south of Bracknell Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 4.12 Greenfield Housing 65 6-15 0 0 30% 20 40% 26 30% 20 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.014 0.020 0.020 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.013 0.019 0.019 0.00022 0.00301 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WAR16 4 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land to rear of The Cricketers, Cricketers Lane Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 3.03 Greenfield Housing 41 6-15 0 0 30% 12 40% 16 30% 12 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.009 0.013 0.013 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.008 0.012 0.012 0.00014 0.00190 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WAR17 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land south of Brockhill Farm Cottages, Bracknell Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.29 Greenfield Housing 5 6-15 0 0 30% 2 40% 2 30% 2 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.00002 0.00023 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR18 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Forest Farm, Forest Road, Hayley Green Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 2.68 Greenfield Housing 34 6-15 0 0 30% 10 40% 14 30% 10 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.011 0.011 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 0.00012 0.00157 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR19 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Woodlawns, Forest Road, Hayley Green Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 2.60 Greenfield Housing 9 6-15 0 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.00003 0.00042 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR20 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield St. Michaels Grange, Osborne Lane Draft SHELAA - Consultation Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 11.25 Greenfield Housing 197 UNKNOWN 0 0 30% 59 40% 79 30% 59 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.061 0.000 0.000 0.018 0.043 0.061 0.061 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.058 0.000 0.000 0.017 0.041 0.058 0.058 0.00067 0.00912 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR21 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Garson Lane & Cock’s Lane Draft SHELAA - Consultation Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.70 Greenfield Housing 60 UNKNOWN 0 0 30% 18 40% 24 30% 18 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.013 0.019 0.019 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.012 0.018 0.018 0.00021 0.00278 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR3 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Jealotts Hill International Research Centre, and land at Jealotts Hill, Maidenhead Road Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 247.51 Greenfield Housing 1200 6-15 0 0 30% 360 40% 480 30% 360 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.373 0.000 0.000 0.112 0.261 0.373 0.373 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.355 0.000 0.000 0.106 0.248 0.355 0.355 0.00411 0.05556 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green Actual use may be a 60 bed care Actual use may be a 60 bed care Actual use may be a 60 bed care home, not residential. Detailed home, not residential. Detailed home, not residential. Detailed WAR4 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land east of Binfield Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.30 Greenfield Housing 25 6-15 0 0 30% 8 40% 10 30% 8 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.008 0.008 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 0.00009 0.00116 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green assessment required at assessment required at assessment required at planning stage. planning stage. planning stage. WAR5 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land south of Forest Road, and east of Binfield Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 16.79 Greenfield Housing 353 6-15 0 0 30% 106 40% 141 30% 106 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.110 0.000 0.000 0.033 0.077 0.110 0.110 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.104 0.000 0.000 0.031 0.073 0.104 0.104 0.00121 0.01634 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Amber Green WAR6 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land at Scotlands Farm Forest Road, Newell Green Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 23.11 Greenfield Housing 405 6-15 0 0 30% 122 40% 162 30% 122 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.126 0.000 0.000 0.038 0.088 0.126 0.126 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.120 0.000 0.000 0.036 0.084 0.120 0.120 0.00139 0.01875 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR7 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land at junction of Harvest Ride and Warfield Road Draft SHELAA Settlement Greenfield Under consideration 0.78 Greenfield Housing 23 6-15 0 0 30% 7 40% 9 30% 7 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 0.00008 0.00106 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR8 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land between Newell Hall and Cuckoo Cottage, Warfield Street Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.53 Greenfield Housing 9 6-15 0 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.00003 0.00042 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WAR9 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land north of Herschel Grange Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.29 Greenfield Housing 34 6-15 0 0 30% 10 40% 14 30% 10 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.011 0.011 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 0.00012 0.00157 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK1 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land at junction of Bracknell Road and Maidens Green Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 1.21 Greenfield Housing 27 6-15 0 0 30% 8 40% 11 30% 8 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.006 0.009 0.009 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.006 0.009 0.009 0.00010 0.00125 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK10 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land north and south of Forest Road, Winkfield Row Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 10.04 Greenfield Housing 211 6-15 0 0 30% 63 40% 84 30% 63 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.070 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.049 0.070 0.070 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.047 0.067 0.067 0.00077 0.00977 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK11 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Lyford Meadow, land west of Locks Ride Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 4.25 Greenfield Housing 81 6-15 0 0 30% 24 40% 32 30% 24 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.027 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.019 0.027 0.027 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.018 0.026 0.026 0.00030 0.00375 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK12 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land to rear of 89 Locks Ride Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.53 Greenfield Housing 9 6-15 0 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.00003 0.00042 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK13 5 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield 89 Locks Ride Draft SHELAA Settlement Greenfield Under consideration 0.28 Greenfield Housing 7 6-15 0 0 30% 2 40% 3 30% 2 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.00003 0.00032 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WINK14 5 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land west of Braziers Lane/Locks Ride and north and south of Forest Road (Winkfield Row) Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 71.00 Greenfield Housing 1120 5-10 0 0 50% 560 50% 560 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.373 0.000 0.000 0.187 0.373 0.373 0.373 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.354 0.000 0.000 0.177 0.354 0.354 0.354 0.00410 0.05185 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WINK15 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Whitegates, Mushroom Castle, Winkfield Row Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 2.48 Greenfield Housing 45 6-15 0 0 30% 14 40% 18 30% 14 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.010 0.015 0.015 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.014 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.010 0.014 0.014 0.00016 0.00208 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK16 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land to rear of Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Rejected 4.63 Greenfield Housing 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK17 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land at Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 3.16 Greenfield Housing 46 6-15 0 0 30% 14 40% 18 30% 14 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.011 0.015 0.015 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.010 0.015 0.015 0.00017 0.00213 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK18 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Whitegates, Longhill Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.71 Greenfield Housing 13 6-15 0 0 30% 4 40% 5 30% 4 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00060 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK19 6 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land between London Road and Longhill Road Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Rejected 1.12 Greenfield Housing 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green WINK2 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land at Elmea, Baileys Garage, and the Haven, Maidens Green Draft SHELAA Green Belt PDL Under consideration 0.55 Mixed Housing 12 6-15 0 0 30% 4 40% 5 30% 4 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.00004 0.00056 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK20 6 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield London Road former landfill site Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Rejected 13.02 Greenfield Housing 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Green Green TW assessed Ascot as Amber, WINK21 6 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield The Brackens, London Road Draft SHELAA Countryside PDL Committed 7.66 Employment Housing 59 6-15 0 0 30% 18 40% 24 30% 18 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.014 0.020 0.020 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.013 0.019 0.019 0.00022 0.00273 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Amber Green consent was exceeded in 2015 WINK22 6 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land to south of London Road, east of Bog Lane and west of Swinley Road (Whitmoor Forest) Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 45.78 Greenfield Housing 773 6-15 0 0 30% 232 40% 309 30% 232 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.257 0.000 0.000 0.077 0.180 0.257 0.257 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.245 0.000 0.000 0.073 0.171 0.245 0.245 0.00283 0.03579 Red TW assessed Ascot as Amber, TWUL Ascot Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Not assessed See TW assessment of cluster. TW to assess at stage 2. Amber Green WINK23 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Lavender Park Golf Club, Swinley Road Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 7.60 Greenfield Housing 112 6-15 0 0 30% 34 40% 45 30% 34 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.026 0.037 0.037 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.025 0.035 0.035 0.00041 0.00519 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green TW assessed Ascot as Amber, WINK24 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Woodstock, Kings Ride Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 1.68 Greenfield Housing 23 6-15 0 0 30% 7 40% 9 30% 7 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.008 0.008 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 0.00008 0.00106 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green consent was exceeded in 2015 WINK25 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Highbury, Prince Albert Drive Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 1.35 Greenfield Housing 29 6-15 0 0 30% 9 40% 12 30% 9 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.006 0.009 0.009 0.00011 0.00134 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK26 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Swinley Edge, Coronation Road Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 4.68 Greenfield Housing 17 6-15 0 0 30% 5 40% 7 30% 5 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.006 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.00006 0.00079 Red TW assessed Ascot as Amber, TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK27 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Earlywood Orchard, Coronation Road Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 1.69 Greenfield Housing 31 6-15 0 0 30% 9 40% 12 30% 9 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.010 0.00011 0.00144 Red TW assessed Ascot as Amber, TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK28 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Winkfield Manor, Forest Road Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 0.55 Greenfield Housing 8 6-15 0 0 30% 2 40% 3 30% 2 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.00003 0.00037 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK29 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land south of Forest Road and north of Rhododendron Walk (Land opposite Ascot Stud Farm) Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 11.37 Greenfield Housing 207 6-15 0 0 30% 62 40% 83 30% 62 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.069 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.048 0.069 0.069 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.065 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.046 0.065 0.065 0.00076 0.00958 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK3 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Meadow View, Crouch Land (Land between Mulberry and The Acre) Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 0.36 Greenfield Housing 9 6-15 0 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.00003 0.00042 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK30 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land at the Rough Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Rejected 11.67 Greenfield Housing 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK31 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land between North Street and Hatchet Lane Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 7.22 Greenfield Housing 125 6-15 0 0 30% 38 40% 50 30% 38 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.029 0.042 0.042 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.040 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.028 0.040 0.040 0.00046 0.00579 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK32 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land between Merrymead and Pine Acres, Birch Lane Draft SHELAA - Consultation Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 0.75 Greenfield Housing 20 UNKNOWN 0 0 30% 6 40% 8 30% 6 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.006 0.00007 0.00093 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green 14/00858/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Popeswood Garage and Hillcrest, London Road (Part of SALP policy SA2) (Laureates Place) 170307 Q3 MED Greenfield Committed 0.35 Greenfield Housing 10 5 0 100% 10 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.00003 0.00046 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/01204/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land Between St Marks Road and London Road (Waiben, The Laurels, The Firs and Crossways) 170307 Q3 MED Greenfield Committed 0.80 Greenfield Housing 14 5 0 100% 14 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00065 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00464/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Parkham, St Marks Road 170307 Q3 MED Greenfield Committed 0.90 Greenfield Housing 13 5 0 100% 13 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00004 0.00060 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/00437/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Adastron House and Byways, Crowthorne Road (Part of SALP policy SA1) 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.48 Housing 36 5 0 100% 36 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.011 0.000 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.011 0.000 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.00012 0.00167 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/00684/PAC* N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Station House, Market Street 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.01 Housing 88 5 0 100% 88 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.027 0.000 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.026 0.000 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.00030 0.00407 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00536/FUL* N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Post Office, 6 High Street 170307 Q3 MED Committed 0.02 Housing 14 5 0 100% 14 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00065 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00004/FUL* N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Edenfield, Larges Lane 170307 Q3 MED Committed 0.42 Housing 48 5 0 100% 48 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.015 0.000 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.014 0.000 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.00016 0.00222 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00456/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Avoncrop, Eastern Road. (Part of SALP Policy SA1) 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.55 Housing 14 5 0 100% 14 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00065 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/00441/OUT N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Foundation House, Eastern Road. (Part of SALP Policy SA1) (The Quarters) 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.92 Housing 123 5 0 100% 123 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.038 0.000 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.038 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.036 0.000 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.00042 0.00569 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00362/REM 15/00212/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Eagle House, The Ring 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.22 Housing 92 5 0 100% 92 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.029 0.000 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.027 0.000 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.00031 0.00426 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00284/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Barnett Court, Larges Lane 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.48 Housing 0 5 0 100% 0 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00618/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Bridgewell Centre, 10A, Ladybank 170307 Q3 MED PDL Completed 0.26 Housing -7 5 0 100% -7 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 -0.002 0.000 -0.002 -0.002 -0.002 -0.002 -0.002 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% -0.002 0.000 -0.002 -0.002 -0.002 -0.002 -0.002 -0.00002 -0.00032 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/01095/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Photon House/Blueprint House, Old Bracknell Lane West (Part of SALP Policy SA1) 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.50 Housing 65 5 0 100% 65 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.020 0.000 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.019 0.000 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.00022 0.00301 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00593/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield 152 New Road, Ascot. (SALP Policy SA2) 170307 Q3 MED Greenfield Committed 0.47 Greenfield Housing 13 5 0 100% 13 0 0 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00060 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 11/00682/OUT N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land South of Foxley Lane & East of Murrell Hill Lane (SALP Policy SA3) (Hazelwood) 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 2.80 Greenfield Housing 67 5 0 100% 67 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.021 0.000 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.020 0.000 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.00023 0.00310 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/00784/REM 13/01072/OUT N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Farley Hall, London Road (Imperial Square) (SALP Policy SA1) 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Completed 2.30 Housing 73 5 0 100% 73 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.023 0.000 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.022 0.000 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.00025 0.00338 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/01010/REM 14/00315/OUT 15/00872/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Land At Amen Corner North (Part of SALP policy SA6) 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Committed 29.94 Greenfield Mixed 377 1500 5 N/A 100% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.267 0.000 0.267 0.267 0.267 0.267 0.267 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.254 0.000 0.254 0.254 0.254 0.254 0.254 0.00294 Manual Calc Required Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00873/REM 13/00966/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Binfield House Nursery, Terrace Road North (SALP policy SA1) 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Committed 1.40 Housing 24 5 0 100% 24 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.007 0.000 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.007 0.000 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.00008 0.00111 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 16/00020/OUT* N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Blue Mountain Golf Club and Conference Centre, Wood Lane (SALP policy SA1) 170307 Q3 LARGE Committed Mixed 400 10000 5 N/A 100% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 1.124 0.000 1.124 1.124 1.124 1.124 1.124 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 1.068 0.000 1.068 1.068 1.068 1.068 1.068 0.01236 Manual Calc Required Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 10/00452/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H15 (Balmoral Gardens) Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 2.60 Greenfield Housing 72 5 0 100% 72 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.022 0.000 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.021 0.000 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.00025 0.00333 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00133/REM 10/00522/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H16 Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 2.19 Greenfield Housing 81 5 0 100% 81 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.025 0.000 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.024 0.000 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.00028 0.00375 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00512/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H18 Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 1.34 Greenfield Housing 59 5 0 100% 59 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.018 0.000 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.017 0.000 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.00020 0.00273 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/00064/REM 11/00062/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H19 Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 2.54 Greenfield Housing 115 5 0 100% 115 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.036 0.000 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.034 0.000 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.00039 0.00532 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/00337/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H20 Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 1.78 Greenfield Housing 43 5 0 100% 43 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.013 0.000 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.013 0.000 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.00015 0.00199 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00261/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H21 Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 3.00 Greenfield Housing 78 5 0 100% 78 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.024 0.000 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.023 0.000 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.00027 0.00361 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00907/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H22 (a) Jennetts View, Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 1.40 Greenfield Housing 55 5 0 100% 55 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.017 0.000 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.016 0.000 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.00019 0.00255 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/00040/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H22 (b) Jennetts View, Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 1.20 Greenfield Housing 47 5 0 100% 47 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.015 0.000 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.014 0.000 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.00016 0.00218 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00199/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Parcel H23 Peacock Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Completed 2.00 Greenfield Housing 85 5 0 100% 85 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.026 0.000 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.025 0.000 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.00029 0.00394 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 11/00878/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Peacock Farm Neighbourhood Centre 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Committed 0.30 Greenfield Housing 28 5 0 100% 28 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.009 0.000 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.008 0.000 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.00010 0.00130 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00312/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Land at former Staff College, Broad Lane (Ramslade House) 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Completed Housing 12 5 0 100% 12 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00004 0.00056 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00476/OUT N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Winchester House, Market Place (Land within Town Centre) 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Committed 0.38 Mixed 311 1000 5 N/A 100% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.197 0.000 0.197 0.197 0.197 0.197 0.197 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.187 0.000 0.187 0.187 0.187 0.187 0.187 0.00216 Manual Calc Required Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/01068/REM 13/00074/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Land at Former Garth Hill College Site, Sandy Lane. (Clement House) (SALP Policy part of SA1). 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Completed 1.50 Housing 64 5 0 100% 64 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.020 0.000 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.019 0.000 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.00022 0.00296 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/00713/CLPUD N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Jubilee Court, Hazell Hill (United House) 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Completed 1.20 Housing -17 5 0 100% -17 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 -0.005 0.000 -0.005 -0.005 -0.005 -0.005 -0.005 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% -0.005 0.000 -0.005 -0.005 -0.005 -0.005 -0.005 -0.00006 -0.00079 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/02007/OUT N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land north of Harvest Ride and south of Forest Road and east of West End Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Committed 57.30 Greenfield Mixed 447 2500 5 N/A 100% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.389 0.000 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.370 0.000 0.370 0.370 0.370 0.370 0.370 0.00428 Manual Calc Required Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/01007/OUT N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land north of Harvest Ride and south of Forest Road and east of West End Lane (Phase 1, Woodhurst Park - Area 2) 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Committed 4.30 Greenfield Housing 87 5 0 100% 87 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.027 0.000 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.026 0.000 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.00030 0.00403 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00646/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land south of Forest Road and west of Avery Lane, Forest Road (Phase 4) 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Committed Greenfield Housing 65 5 0 100% 65 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.020 0.000 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.019 0.000 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.00022 0.00301 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00647/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land south of Forest Road and west of Avery Lane, Forest Road (Phase 4a) 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Committed Greenfield Housing 58 5 0 100% 58 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.018 0.000 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.017 0.000 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.00020 0.00269 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00163/REM N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Land north of Harvest Ride and South of Forest Road and east of West End Lane (Phase3) 170307 Q3 LARGE Greenfield Committed 2.90 Greenfield Housing 93 5 0 100% 93 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.029 0.000 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.027 0.000 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.00032 0.00431 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00547/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Orchard Lea, Winkfield Lane 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Committed 1.65 Housing 14 5 0 100% 14 0 0 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00065 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00434/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield HFC Bank, North Street (Montague Park) 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Committed 5.40 Housing 22 5 0 100% 22 0 0 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.007 0.000 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.007 0.000 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.00008 0.00102 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/00858/FUL N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Kingswood, King's Ride, Ascot 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Committed 9.20 Housing 38 5 0 100% 38 0 0 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.013 0.000 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.012 0.000 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.00014 0.00176 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green Windfall - Binfield N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Various sites in Binfield WINDFALL Under consideration Housing 149 Yearly 0 20% 30 25% 37 25% 37 25% 37 5% 7 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.046 0.000 0.009 0.021 0.032 0.044 0.046 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.044 0.000 0.009 0.020 0.031 0.042 0.044 0.00051 0.00690 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green Windfall - Bracknell Town N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Various sites in Bracknell Town WINDFALL Under consideration Housing 225 Yearly 0 20% 45 25% 56 25% 56 25% 56 5% 11 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.070 0.000 0.014 0.032 0.049 0.067 0.070 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.067 0.000 0.013 0.030 0.047 0.063 0.067 0.00077 0.01042 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green Windfall - Warfield N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Various sites in Warfield WINDFALL Under consideration Housing 318 Yearly 0 20% 64 25% 80 25% 80 25% 80 5% 16 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.099 0.000 0.020 0.045 0.069 0.094 0.099 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.094 0.000 0.019 0.042 0.066 0.089 0.094 0.00109 0.01472 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green Windfall - Winkfield N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Various sites in Winkfield WINDFALL Under consideration Housing 334 Yearly 0 20% 67 25% 84 25% 84 25% 84 5% 17 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.111 0.000 0.022 0.050 0.078 0.106 0.111 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.106 0.000 0.021 0.048 0.074 0.100 0.106 0.00122 0.01546 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green WINK33 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land south of Merrymead and land at Pine Acres, Birch Lane Draft SHELAA - Consultation Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.26 Greenfield Housing 20 UNKNOWN 0 0 30% 6 40% 8 30% 6 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.006 0.00007 0.00093 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK4 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Chilston Mews, North Street Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 1.07 Greenfield Housing 23 6-15 0 0 30% 7 40% 9 30% 7 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.008 0.008 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 0.00008 0.00106 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green Windfall - Crowthorne N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Crowthorne Various sites in Crowthorne WINDFALL Under consideration Housing 1 Yearly 0 20% 0 25% 0 25% 0 25% 0 5% 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00000 0.00005 Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green WINK5 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land to south west of Elm Lodge, North Street Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 0.60 Greenfield Housing 10 6-15 0 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.00004 0.00046 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green Potential for site to be Potential for site to be Potential for site to be commercial rather than commercial rather than commercial rather than residential. Residential residential. Residential residential. Residential WINK6 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield White House Farm, North Street (Royal Berkshire Fishery) Draft SHELAA Green Belt Greenfield Under consideration 5.82 Greenfield Housing 54 6-15 0 0 30% 16 40% 22 30% 16 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.013 0.018 0.018 Green development is likely to be Amber development is likely to be TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.012 0.017 0.017 0.00020 0.00250 Amber development is likely to be TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green worse-case for water demand, worse-case for water demand, worse-case for water demand, therefore residential option therefore residential option therefore residential option considered. considered. considered. WINK7 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Ronans, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 1.35 Greenfield Housing 21 6-15 0 0 30% 6 40% 8 30% 6 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.007 0.00008 0.00097 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK8 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Land at Row Farm (north and south of Forest Road), Winkfield Row Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 8.33 Greenfield Housing 174 6-15 0 0 30% 52 40% 70 30% 52 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.058 0.000 0.000 0.017 0.041 0.058 0.058 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.055 0.000 0.000 0.017 0.039 0.055 0.055 0.00064 0.00806 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green WINK9 N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Somerton Farm, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 17.31 Greenfield Housing 300 6-15 0 0 30% 90 40% 120 30% 90 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.070 0.100 0.100 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.095 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.066 0.095 0.095 0.00110 0.01389 Amber TWUL Bracknell Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Green Green 15/01082/FUL* N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Crowthorne 48-50 Dukes Ride 170307 Q3 MED Committed Housing 30 5 0 100% 30 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.009 0.000 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.009 0.000 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.00010 0.00139 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/00919/PAC N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Crowthorne Manhattan House, 140 High Street 170307 Q3 MED PDL Committed 0.10 Housing 15 5 0 100% 15 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00005 0.00069 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 14/01186/PAC N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Crowthorne Guildgate House, High Street 170307 Q3 MED PDL Completed 0.60 Housing 16 5 0 100% 16 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.00005 0.00074 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/00366/FUL* N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Crowthorne Land At Bowman Court, Dukes Ride (SALP policy SA3) 170307 Q3 LARGE Committed 1.19 Housing 36 5 0 100% 36 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.011 0.000 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.011 0.000 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.00012 0.00167 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 13/00575/OUT N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Crowthorne Land at former TRL site, Nine Mile Ride (SALP plicy SA5) 170307 Q3 LARGE PDL Committed 102.40 Mixed 1000 5000 5 N/A 100% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.811 0.000 0.811 0.811 0.811 0.811 0.811 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.771 0.000 0.771 0.771 0.771 0.771 0.771 0.00892 Manual Calc Required Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green Windfall - Sandhurst Town N Bracknell Forest Council Yes Sandhurst Town Various sites in Sandhurst Town WINDFALL Under consideration Housing 93 Yearly 0 20% 19 25% 23 25% 23 25% 23 5% 5 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.029 0.000 0.006 0.013 0.020 0.027 0.029 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.027 0.000 0.005 0.012 0.019 0.026 0.027 0.00032 0.00431 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA30 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No HA30: Ascot Station Car Park Draft Borough Local Plan December 2016 Allocated Housing 35 0 30% 11 40% 14 30% 11 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.012 0.000 0.003 0.008 0.012 0.012 0.012 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.011 0.000 0.003 0.008 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.00013 0.00162 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA31 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No HA31: Englemere Lodge, London Road, Ascot Draft Borough Local Plan December 2017 Allocated Housing 10 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.00004 0.00046 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA32 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No ‘HA32: Heatherwood Hospital, Ascot’ Draft Borough Local Plan December 2018 Allocated Housing 250 0 30% 75 40% 100 30% 75 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.083 0.000 0.025 0.058 0.083 0.083 0.083 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.079 0.000 0.024 0.055 0.079 0.079 0.079 0.00092 0.01157 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA33 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No HA33: Silwood Park, Sunningdale Draft Borough Local Plan December 2019 Allocated Housing 75 0 30% 23 40% 30 30% 23 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.025 0.000 0.007 0.017 0.025 0.025 0.025 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.024 0.000 0.007 0.017 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.00027 0.00347 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA34 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No HA34: Sunningdale Park, Sunningdale Draft Borough Local Plan December 2020 Allocated Housing 230 0 30% 69 40% 92 30% 69 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.077 0.000 0.023 0.054 0.077 0.077 0.077 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.073 0.000 0.022 0.051 0.073 0.073 0.073 0.00084 0.01065 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA35 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No HA35: Gas holder site, Bridge Road, Sunninghill Draft Borough Local Plan December 2021 Allocated Housing 53 0 30% 16 40% 21 30% 16 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.018 0.000 0.005 0.012 0.018 0.018 0.018 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.017 0.000 0.005 0.012 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.00019 0.00245 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA36 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No HA36: Broomhall Car Park, Sunningdale Draft Borough Local Plan December 2022 Allocated Housing 28 0 30% 8 40% 11 30% 8 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.009 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.009 0.009 0.009 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.009 0.000 0.003 0.006 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.00010 0.00130 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 TW assessed Ascot as Amber, HA37 N Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead No HA37: White House, London Road, Ascot Draft Borough Local Plan December 2023 Allocated Housing 10 0 30% 3 40% 4 30% 3 0 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.00004 0.00046 Red but increased to Red as flow TWUL Ascot Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green consent was exceeded in 2015 5WI002 N Wokingham Borough Council No Pinewood, Nine Mile Ride Call for sites Unknown 9.77 Housing 342 0 0 30% 103 40% 137 30% 103 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.106 0.000 0.000 0.032 0.075 0.106 0.106 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.101 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.071 0.101 0.101 0.00117 0.01583 Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 5WI011 N Wokingham Borough Council No Heathlands Garden Centre, Heathlands Call for sites Unknown 3.77 Employment 132 N/A N/A 30% N/A 40% N/A 30% N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.041 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.029 0.041 0.041 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.039 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.027 0.039 0.039 0.00045 0.00264 Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 5WI014 N Wokingham Borough Council No Land at Heathlands, Nine Mile Ride Call for sites Unknown 4.06 Housing 142 0 0 30% 43 40% 57 30% 43 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.044 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.031 0.044 0.044 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.029 0.042 0.042 0.00049 0.00657 Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 5WI018 N Wokingham Borough Council No Heathlands Farm, Honey Hill, Wokingham, RG40 3BG Call for sites Unknown 39.68 Housing 1389 0 0 30% 417 40% 556 30% 417 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.432 0.000 0.000 0.130 0.303 0.432 0.432 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.411 0.000 0.000 0.123 0.287 0.411 0.411 0.00475 0.06431 Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 5WI019 N Wokingham Borough Council No Holme Grange Farm Heathlands Road Wokingham Berkshire RG40 3AW Call for sites Unknown 6.14 Housing 215 0 0 30% 65 40% 86 30% 65 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.047 0.067 0.067 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.064 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.044 0.064 0.064 0.00074 0.00995 Red TWUL Easthampstead Park Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green SHL272 N Hart District Council No Yateley Land between Eversley Road and Firgrove Road Draft Local Plan Under consideration Housing 88 0 0 30% 26 40% 35 30% 26 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.027 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.019 0.027 0.027 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.018 0.026 0.026 0.00030 0.00407 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 15/02131/FUL N Hart District Council No Blackwater White Hart House, London Road 5-year land supply Committed Housing 13 0 100% 13 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00004 0.00060 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green 12/00432/MAJOR N Hart District Council No Yateley Land South Of Blackwater River and East Of Sandhurst Road 5-year land supply Committed Housing 45 0 100% 45 0 0 0 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.014 0.000 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Green Green TWUL Sandhurst 95% 0.013 0.000 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.00015 0.00208 Green TWUL Sandhurst Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed To be assessed by TW at stage 2 Not assessed Green Adopted WRMP has planned for the increase in Sufficient Environmental Capacity. Proposed Site is unlikely to be impacted by odour from Additional flow ≤5% of Q30. Low risk that demand, or sufficient time to address supply Capacity available to serve the proposed growth Capacity available to serve the proposed growth Capacity available to serve the proposed growth Capacity available to serve the proposed growth development has no significant impact on the water WwTW increased discharges will increase fluvial flood risk. demand issues in the next WRMP. body's potential for reaching GES.
Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades are Infrastructure and/or treatment work upgrades Good Ecological Status cannot be achieved due to current Insufficient evidence in adopted WRMP to confirm are required to serve proposed growth, but no are required to serve proposed growth, but no required to serve proposed growth, but no significant are required to serve proposed growth, but no Site location is such that an odour impact Additional flow ≥5% of Q30. Moderate risk that technology limits. Ensure proposed growth doesn't cause that the planned increase in demand can be met significant constraints to the provision of this significant constraints to the provision of this constraints to the provision of this infrastructure have significant constraints to the provision of this assessment is recommended increased discharges will increase fluvial flood risk. significant deterioration. infrastructure have been identified . infrastructure have been identified . been identified . infrastructure have been identified .
Adopted WRMP does not take into consideration Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be required Infrastructure and/or treatment upgrades will be Proposed development can be accommodated with a Site is in an area with confirmed WwTW odour Additional flow ≥5% of Q100. High risk that the planned increase in demand. Additional required to serve proposed growth. Major required to serve proposed growth. Major to serve proposed growth. Major constraints have been required to serve proposed growth. Major tighter permit and upgrade to treatment. This is issues. increased discharges will increase fluvial flood risk. water resources may be required. constraints have been identified. constraints have been identified. identified. constraints have been identified. achievable with current technology.
Environmental capacity could be a constraint to growth
Site information Profiling by AMP Period Water Supply Wastewater Flood risk Water Quality Check on Potential AMP5 (2010‐ AMP6 (2015‐ AMP7 (2020‐ AMP8 (2025‐ AMP9 (2030‐ AMP10 (2035‐ Per capita Average Per capita Percentage of Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Potential Developability AMP5 (2010‐15) AMP6 (2015‐20) AMP7 (2020‐25) AMP8 (2025‐30) AMP9 (2030‐35) AMP10 (2035‐40) percentage Company Wastewater Foul Sewerage Surface Water Site boundary Site encroaches Effluent In study Parish / housing 15) 20) 25) 30) 35) 40) Water Resource domestic occupancy employment Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Demand by end Water Water Supply Water Supply Networks water used Demand by Demand by Demand by Demand by Demand by Demand by Average Foul Sewers for Adoption WwTW Flow Sewerage Sewerage Foul Sewerage Network Capacity Surface Water Network Capacity Location of site Odour Effluent discharge flood risk Site Code Local Planning Authority Location Source Locational Status PDL Status Status Site Area (Ha) Current Use Proposed Use employment (within next X profiled Water Company Demand (Ml/d) Water Resources Comments Treating WwTW Demand WwTW Flow Capacity Comments Network Network distance from closer than existing Odour screening comments discharge flood Water Quality RAG Water Quality Comments area? Settlement number Zone consumption (persons per consumption of AMP5 (Ml/d) of AMP6 (Ml/d) of AMP7 (Ml/d) of AMP8 (Ml/d) of AMP9 (Ml/d) of AMP10 (Ml/d) Resources RAG Networks RAG Comments returned to end of AMP5 end of AMP6 end of AMP7 end of AMP8 end of AMP9 end of AMP10 Flow (m3/s) Design Foul Flow (m3/s) Capacity RAG Undertaker catchment Comments Comments relative to WwTW Screening RAG Comments (m2) years) Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage (should be Wastewater (Ml/d) Capacity RAG capacity WwTW (m) urban area? risk RAG (units) Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings (m3/p/d) household) (m3/p/d) sewer (Ml/d) (Ml/d) (Ml/d) (Ml/d) (Ml/d) (Ml/d) 100%) This RAG score just reflects the network capacity. The site benefits by being close Surface water should be dealt to Bracknell STW's but there may still be Bracknell STW will require with on site and SUDS should be Scores green because all sites storage or upgrades required on site and CLUSTER1 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Binfield Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 63.19 Greenfield Mixed 874 465 10 N/A N/A 30% N/A 40% N/A 30% N/A N/A 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.319 0.000 0.000 0.096 0.223 0.319 0.319 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.303 0.000 0.000 0.091 0.212 0.303 0.303 0.00350 Manual Calc Required Amber upgrades in order to TWUL Bracknell Amber Amber incorperated. There are no Green within the cluster are identified Green around to get the flow to the STW. At accommodate this development surface water sewers near the as green. Land west of Murrell Hill Lane, and south of Foxley this time cannot say categorically say development. Lane (comprising Foxley Fields, Whitehouse Farm, what upgrades if any may be reuired to Murrell Hill Grange, Popes Manor and Popes Farm) the local network. This RAG score just reflects the network Surface water should be dealt Easthampstead Park STW will capacity. The site is close to with on site and SUDS should be Scores amber because at least require significant upgrades in Easthampstead STW so any network CLUSTER2 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 61.17 Greenfield Housing 786 6‐15 0 0 30% 236 40% 314 30% 236 0 100% SEW RZ5 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.245 0.000 0.000 0.073 0.171 0.245 0.245 Green Green TWUL Easthampstead Park 95% 0.232 0.000 0.000 0.070 0.163 0.232 0.232 0.00269 0.03639 Red TWUL Easthampstead PAmber Amber incorperated. The heirarchy of Amber one site within the cluster is Green order to accommodate this upgrades required may not be as surface water diposal should be identified as amber. Land at Parkview Farm and Easthampstead Park, Old development extensive as if the site was some way followed. Wokingham Road from the STW This site is adjacent to Easthampstead Park STW. If flows were to go there it is unlikley network upgrades would be Surface water should be dealt Bracknell STW will require required. This comment is only relavnt with on site and SUDS should be Scores amber because at least CLUSTER3 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Bracknell Town Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 56.90 Greenfield Housing 599 10 0 0 30% 180 40% 240 30% 180 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.186 0.000 0.000 0.056 0.130 0.186 0.186 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.177 0.000 0.000 0.053 0.124 0.177 0.177 0.00205 0.02773 Amber upgrades in order to TWUL Bracknell Green to the network and does not take into Amber incorperated. There are no Amber one site within the cluster is Green accommodate this development account STW capacity. Should the STW surface water sewers near the identified as amber. not have the required capacity upgrades development. may be required to the network to take Land at the Hideout and Beaufont Park, Nine Mile Ride flows elsewhere. This RAG score just reflects the network capacity. The site benefits by being close Surface water should be dealt to Bracknell STW's but there may still be Bracknell STW will require with on site and SUDS should be Scores green because all sites storage or upgrades required on site and CLUSTER4 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Warfield Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 18.75 Greenfield Housing 389 1‐15 0 0 30% 117 40% 156 30% 117 0 100% SEW RZ4 0.126 2.5 0.100 0.121 0.000 0.000 0.036 0.085 0.121 0.121 Green Green TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.115 0.000 0.000 0.035 0.081 0.115 0.115 0.00133 0.01801 Amber upgrades in order to TWUL Bracknell Amber Amber incorperated. There are no Green within the cluster are identified Green around to get the flow to the STW. At accommodate this development surface water sewers near the as green. this time cannot say categorically say development. Land south of Bracknell Road, north of Forest Road, and what upgrades if any may be reuired to west of Cricketers Lane, Hayley Green the local network. Surface water should be dealt Bracknell STW will require with on site and SUDS should be Scores green because all sites Due to the size of the development some CLUSTER5 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 71.28 Greenfield Housing 1123 10 0 0 30% 337 40% 449 30% 337 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.374 0.000 0.000 0.112 0.262 0.374 0.374 Green Amber TWUL Bracknell 95% 0.355 0.000 0.000 0.107 0.249 0.355 0.355 0.00411 0.05199 Amber upgrades in order to TWUL Bracknell Red Red incorperated. There are no Green within the cluster are identified Green network enhancements very likely accommodate this development surface water sewers near the as green. Land at Winkfield Row development. This RAG score just reflects the network capacity. The site benefits by being close Surface water should be dealt to Bracknell STW's but there may still be TW assessed Ascot as Amber, but with on site and SUDS should be Scores amber because at least storage or upgrades required on site and CLUSTER6 Bracknell Forest Council Yes Winkfield Draft SHELAA Countryside Greenfield Under consideration 67.58 Greenfield Housing 810 6‐15 0 0 30% 243 40% 324 30% 243 0 100% AfW WRZ6 0.122 2.7 0.100 0.270 0.000 0.000 0.081 0.189 0.270 0.270 Green Amber TWUL Ascot 95% 0.256 0.000 0.000 0.077 0.179 0.256 0.256 0.00297 0.03750 Red increased to Red as flow consent TWUL Ascot Amber Amber incorperated. There are no Amber one site within the cluster is Green around to get the flow to the STW. At was exceeded in 2015 surface water sewers near the identified as amber. Land at London Road (comprising land between London this time cannot say categorically say development. Road/Longhill Road, former tip, The Brackens and what upgrades if any may be reuired to Whitmoor Forest). the local network.
C Appendix - Affinity Water Supply Network Assessment
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 VI
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 VII
Bracknell Forest allocated growth sites assessment
1 Bracknell Forest Allocated Growth Sites All sites received from the council are shown in the table below. The sites have been grouped in one area that has been scaled to represent summer demand conditions. The whole sites for Winkfield are the AW area. One site for Warfield can be also connected to the AW network. Site Parish Current Proposed Pot Housing Location Locational Status Site Area Ha Code Settlement Use Use Nu WAR17 Warfield Land south of Brockhill Farm Cottages, Bracknell Road Countryside 0.29 Greenfield Housing 5 WINK1 Winkfield Land at junction of Bracknell Road and Maidens Green Green Belt 1.21 Greenfield Housing 27 WINK2 Winkfield Land at Elmea, Baileys Garage, and the Haven, Maidens Green Green Belt 0.55 Mixed Housing 12
WINK3 Winkfield Meadow View, Crouch Land (Land between Mulberry and The Acre) Green Belt 0.36 Greenfield Housing 9 WINK4 Winkfield Chilston Mews, North Street Green Belt 1.07 Greenfield Housing 23 WINK5 Winkfield Land to south west of Elm Lodge, North Street Green Belt 0.60 Greenfield Housing 10 WINK6 Winkfield White House Farm, North Street (Royal Berkshire Fishery) Green Belt 5.82 Greenfield Housing 54 WINK7 Winkfield Ronans, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 1.35 Greenfield Housing 21 WINK8 Winkfield Land at Row Farm (north and south of Forest Road), Winkfield Row Countryside 8.33 Greenfield Housing 174 WINK9 Winkfield Somerton Farm, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 17.31 Greenfield Housing 300 WINK10 Winkfield Land north and south of Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 10.04 Greenfield Housing 211 WINK11 Winkfield Lyford Meadow, land west of Locks Ride Countryside 4.25 Greenfield Housing 81 WINK12 Winkfield Land to rear of 89 Locks Ride Countryside 0.53 Greenfield Housing 9 WINK13 Winkfield 89 Locks Ride Settlement 0.28 Greenfield Housing 7 Land west of Braziers Lane/Locks Ride and north and south of Forest Road WINK14 Winkfield Countryside 71.00 Greenfield Housing 1120 (Winkfield Row) WINK15 Winkfield Whitegates, Mushroom Castle, Winkfield Row Countryside 2.48 Greenfield Housing 45 WINK16 Winkfield Land to rear of Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Countryside 4.63 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK17 Winkfield Land at Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Countryside 3.16 Greenfield Housing 46 WINK18 Winkfield Whitegates, Longhill Road Countryside 1.71 Greenfield Housing 13 WINK19 Winkfield Land between London Road and Longhill Road Countryside 1.12 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK20 Winkfield London Road former landfill site Countryside 13.02 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK21 Winkfield The Brackens, London Road Countryside 7.66 Employment Housing 59 Land to south of London Road, east of Bog Lane and west of Swinley Road WINK22 Winkfield Countryside 45.78 Greenfield Housing 773 (Whitmoor Forest) WINK23 Winkfield Lavender Park Golf Club, Swinley Road Green Belt 7.60 Greenfield Housing 112 WINK24 Winkfield Woodstock, Kings Ride Green Belt 1.68 Greenfield Housing 23 WINK25 Winkfield Highbury, Prince Albert Drive Green Belt 1.35 Greenfield Housing 29 WINK26 Winkfield Swinley Edge, Coronation Road Green Belt 4.68 Greenfield Housing 17 WINK27 Winkfield Earlywood Orchard, Coronation Road Green Belt 1.69 Greenfield Housing 31 WINK28 Winkfield Winkfield Manor, Forest Road Green Belt 0.55 Greenfield Housing 8 Land south of Forest Road and north of Rhododendron Walk (Land opposite WINK29 Winkfield Green Belt 11.37 Greenfield Housing 207 Ascot Stud Farm) WINK30 Winkfield Land at the Rough Green Belt 11.67 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK31 Winkfield Land between North Street and Hatchet Lane Green Belt 7.22 Greenfield Housing 125 WINK32 Winkfield Countryside 0.75 Greenfield Housing 20 WINK33 Winkfield Countryside 1.26 Greenfield Housing 20 2 Bracknell Forest Sites Location
Pot Site Parish Site Area Current Propose Location Locational Status Housing Code Settlement Ha Use d Use Nu WAR17 Warfield Land south of Brockhill Farm Cottages, Bracknell Road Countryside 0.29 Greenfield Housing 5 WINK1 Winkfield Land at junction of Bracknell Road and Maidens Green Green Belt 1.21 Greenfield Housing 27 Land at Elmea, Baileys Garage, and the Haven, WINK2 Winkfield Green Belt 0.55 Mixed Housing 12 Maidens Green Meadow View, Crouch Land (Land between Mulberry WINK3 Winkfield Green Belt 0.36 Greenfield Housing 9 and The Acre) WINK4 Winkfield Chilston Mews, North Street Green Belt 1.07 Greenfield Housing 23 WINK5 Winkfield Land to south west of Elm Lodge, North Street Green Belt 0.60 Greenfield Housing 10 White House Farm, North Street (Royal Berkshire WINK6 Winkfield Green Belt 5.82 Greenfield Housing 54 Fishery) WINK7 Winkfield Ronans, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 1.35 Greenfield Housing 21 Land at Row Farm (north and south of Forest Road), WINK8 Winkfield Countryside 8.33 Greenfield Housing 174 Winkfield Row WINK9 Winkfield Somerton Farm, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 17.31 Greenfield Housing 300 WINK10 Winkfield Land north and south of Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 10.04 Greenfield Housing 211 WINK11 Winkfield Lyford Meadow, land west of Locks Ride Countryside 4.25 Greenfield Housing 81 WINK12 Winkfield Land to rear of 89 Locks Ride Countryside 0.53 Greenfield Housing 9 WINK13 Winkfield 89 Locks Ride Settlement 0.28 Greenfield Housing 7 Land west of Braziers Lane/Locks Ride and north and WINK14 Winkfield Countryside 71.00 Greenfield Housing 1120 south of Forest Road (Winkfield Row) WINK15 Winkfield Whitegates, Mushroom Castle, Winkfield Row Countryside 2.48 Greenfield Housing 45 WINK16 Winkfield Land to rear of Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Countryside 4.63 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK17 Winkfield Land at Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Countryside 3.16 Greenfield Housing 46 WINK18 Winkfield Whitegates, Longhill Road Countryside 1.71 Greenfield Housing 13 WINK19 Winkfield Land between London Road and Longhill Road Countryside 1.12 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK20 Winkfield London Road former landfill site Countryside 13.02 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK21 Winkfield The Brackens, London Road Countryside 7.66 Employment Housing 59 Land to south of London Road, east of Bog Lane and WINK22 Winkfield Countryside 45.78 Greenfield Housing 773 west of Swinley Road (Whitmoor Forest) WINK23 Winkfield Lavender Park Golf Club, Swinley Road Green Belt 7.60 Greenfield Housing 112 WINK24 Winkfield Woodstock, Kings Ride Green Belt 1.68 Greenfield Housing 23 WINK25 Winkfield Highbury, Prince Albert Drive Green Belt 1.35 Greenfield Housing 29 WINK26 Winkfield Swinley Edge, Coronation Road Green Belt 4.68 Greenfield Housing 17 WINK27 Winkfield Earlywood Orchard, Coronation Road Green Belt 1.69 Greenfield Housing 31 WINK28 Winkfield Winkfield Manor, Forest Road Green Belt 0.55 Greenfield Housing 8 Land south of Forest Road and north of Rhododendron WINK29 Winkfield Green Belt 11.37 Greenfield Housing 207 Walk (Land opposite Ascot Stud Farm) WINK30 Winkfield Land at the Rough Green Belt 11.67 Greenfield Housing 0 WINK31 Winkfield Land between North Street and Hatchet Lane Green Belt 7.22 Greenfield Housing 125 WINK32 Winkfield Countryside 0.75 Greenfield Housing 20 WINK33 Winkfield Countryside 1.26 Greenfield Housing 20
All sites shown in the table are located in the area within the red boundary 3
Performance of the Network for Bracknell Forest sites
Network performances have been assessed in 2 different scenarios:
1. Current demand 2. Future demand (including future developments in AW records and Bracknell Forest sites listed in the table on slide 2). All the assessed scenarios have been scaled to reflect peak summer demand conditions.
According to the simulation results: • the demand increase due to the Bracknell Forest sites are: Pot Demand SiteCode ParishSettlement Location Locational Status Site Area Ha Current Use ProposedUse Housing Nu Increase MLD WAR17 Warfield Land south of Brockhill Farm Cottages, Bracknell Road Countryside 0.29 Greenfield Housing 5 0.003 WINK1 Winkfield Land at junction of Bracknell Road and Maidens Green Green Belt 1.21 Greenfield Housing 27 0.016 WINK2 Winkfield Land at Elmea, Baileys Garage, and the Haven, Maidens Green Green Belt 0.55 Mixed Housing 12 0.007 WINK3 Winkfield Meadow View, Crouch Land (Land between Mulberry and The Acre) Green Belt 0.36 Greenfield Housing 9 0.005 WINK4 Winkfield Chilston Mews, North Street Green Belt 1.07 Greenfield Housing 23 0.014 WINK5 Winkfield Land to south west of Elm Lodge, North Street Green Belt 0.60 Greenfield Housing 10 0.006 WINK6 Winkfield White House Farm, North Street (Royal Berkshire Fishery) Green Belt 5.82 Greenfield Housing 54 0.032 WINK7 Winkfield Ronans, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 1.35 Greenfield Housing 21 0.013 WINK8 Winkfield Land at Row Farm (north and south of Forest Road), Winkfield Row Countryside 8.33 Greenfield Housing 174 0.104 WINK9 Winkfield Somerton Farm, Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 17.31 Greenfield Housing 300 0.179 WINK10 Winkfield Land north and south of Forest Road, Winkfield Row Countryside 10.04 Greenfield Housing 211 0.125 WINK11 Winkfield Lyford Meadow, land west of Locks Ride Countryside 4.25 Greenfield Housing 81 0.048 WINK12 Winkfield Land to rear of 89 Locks Ride Countryside 0.53 Greenfield Housing 9 0.005 WINK13 Winkfield 89 Locks Ride Settlement 0.28 Greenfield Housing 7 0.004 WINK14 Winkfield Land west of Braziers Lane/Locks Ride and north and south of Forest Road (Winkfield Row) Countryside 71.00 Greenfield Housing 1120 0.667 WINK15 Winkfield Whitegates, Mushroom Castle, Winkfield Row Countryside 2.48 Greenfield Housing 45 0.027 WINK16 Winkfield Land to rear of Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Countryside 4.63 Greenfield Housing 0 0.000 WINK17 Winkfield Land at Chavey Down Farm, Longhill Road Countryside 3.16 Greenfield Housing 46 0.027 WINK18 Winkfield Whitegates, Longhill Road Countryside 1.71 Greenfield Housing 13 0.008 WINK19 Winkfield Land between London Road and Longhill Road Countryside 1.12 Greenfield Housing 0 0.000 WINK20 Winkfield London Road former landfill site Countryside 13.02 Greenfield Housing 0 0.000 WINK21 Winkfield The Brackens, London Road Countryside 7.66 Employment Housing 59 0.035 WINK22 Winkfield Land to south of London Road, east of Bog Lane and west of Swinley Road (Whitmoor Forest) Countryside 45.78 Greenfield Housing 773 0.460 WINK23 Winkfield Lavender Park Golf Club, Swinley Road Green Belt 7.60 Greenfield Housing 112 0.067 WINK24 Winkfield Woodstock, Kings Ride Green Belt 1.68 Greenfield Housing 23 0.014 WINK25 Winkfield Highbury, Prince Albert Drive Green Belt 1.35 Greenfield Housing 29 0.017 WINK26 Winkfield Swinley Edge, Coronation Road Green Belt 4.68 Greenfield Housing 17 0.010 WINK27 Winkfield Earlywood Orchard, Coronation Road Green Belt 1.69 Greenfield Housing 31 0.018 WINK28 Winkfield Winkfield Manor, Forest Road Green Belt 0.55 Greenfield Housing 8 0.005 WINK29 Winkfield Land south of Forest Road and north of Rhododendron Walk (Land opposite Ascot Stud Farm) Green Belt 11.37 Greenfield Housing 207 0.123 WINK30 Winkfield Land at the Rough Green Belt 11.67 Greenfield Housing 0 0.000 WINK31 Winkfield Land between North Street and Hatchet Lane Green Belt 7.22 Greenfield Housing 125 0.074 WINK32 Winkfield Countryside 0.75 Greenfield Housing 20 0.012 WINK33 Winkfield Countryside 1.26 Greenfield Housing 20 0.012 TOTALS (MLD) 2.138
• The pressure drop at the critical point both in terms of minimum level of service required (>15m) and percentage drop (5%) is enough to justify major reinforcements in the network in the area when all future developments in AW records and Bracknell Forest sites are taken into account)
All the proposed reinforcements will aim to recover the current level of service and the loss of capacity in the network due to the additional load imposed by the whole future demand.
Each developer will contribute to the required reinforcements depending on the relative impact on the network. 4
This page is intentionally left blank
2017s5665 - Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Water Cycle Study v2-0 VIII
Offices at Coleshill Doncaster Dublin Edinburgh Exeter Glasgow Haywards Heath Isle of Man Limerick Newcastle upon Tyne Newport Peterborough Saltaire Skipton Tadcaster Thirsk Wallingford Warrington
Registered Office South Barn Broughton Hall SKIPTON North Yorkshire BD23 3AE United Kingdom
t: +44(0)1756 799919 e: [email protected]
Jeremy Benn Associates Ltd Registered in England 3246693
Visit our website www.jbaconsulting.com