Support

Allocations Submission Document

Representation ID: 28805

Received: 25/01/2013

Respondent: Environment Agency

Representation Summary:

There is a potential risk about the delivery of the site which we are bringing to the inspectors attention. We are also suggesting a minor amendment to the reference made in para 2.55 to the Sequential Test.

Full text:

We have an outstanding holding objection for a planning application at this site, referenced 11/00494/FUL, on flood risk grounds.

To date the developer has been unable to submit information which demonstrates the flood defence works, required to make the development safe from flooding for its lifetime, can be delivered and maintained in perpetuity. We have discussed a couple of options with the developer but none have yet been demonstrated as viable. The first scheme required the adjacent landowners consent to construct the defence on their land, which could not be agreed, and the second proposal has issues with the juxta-position of the watercourse and footway adjacent to Mill Lane.

There may well be alternative schemes that the developer can consider but they have yet to be presented to us. Further given the strategic importance of this site to the Council, they could use their Compulsory Purchase Powers to make the first option work. We also have Permissive Powers and Compulsory Purchase Powers for defences but these are not indented to facilitate new defences for new development, especially where other bodies have the same powers.

There is therefore a risk that the site is not deliverable as evidence has yet to be provided that a viable scheme can be provided. We do not however consider this to be a matter which falls directly within our statutory remit but it is a matter which we wish to bring to the inspectors attention.

In addition please note that paragraph 2.55 advises the Sequential Test needs to be passed for any future development of the site. We remind you that you considered and passed this Test for your Core Strategy. In accordance with paragraph 104 of the NPPF this Test does not need to be applied again. We therefore suggest you remove this reference by way of a minor amendment.

Finally we wish it to be noted that we support the concept statement acknowledging:
- SuDS need to be provided and a drainage strategy submitted;
- That you have acknowledged upgrades to the foul water infrastructure network maybe required;
- That a management plan will be required given the proximity of the site to national and international designations.