Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Support

Representation ID: 7003

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

Rutland County council is in a serious water stressed area as outlined in the 2021 classification https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/water-stressed-areas-2021- classification.
This could be made worse by growth and climate change effects. To mitigate this, water resources need to be more efficiently used in new homes and businesses.
We therefore support this policy. We support the requirement for the higher water efficiency standard of 110 litres per day per person in residential development.
We particularly welcome the encouragement to go further to 85 litres per day per person.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 7616

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

We would suggest the following sentence is added into criterion b of the policy:

b) that the development will be resilient to flood risk from all forms of flooding such that in the event of a flood the development could be quickly brought back into use without significant refurbishment. Through the application of the sequential and exception test, as well as the guidance set out in NPPF, development should be located in areas of the lowest flood risk.

Furthermore, we would welcome an additional criterion to encourage proposals to deliver nature-based solutions to mitigation flood risk, including enhancements to the green and blue infrastructure network, where possible.
We support the ‘Why is this policy needed? (Protecting the water environment section)’ section, which states the LPA will liaise with the EA, IDBs and Water Services providers when relevant proposals come in to discuss and prepare drainage solutions to cope with increased waste water and sewage effluent. However, we would recommend more detail regarding this is added into Policy INF1

Support noted. Agree to delete ‘major’ from first line of Policy CC14 so that it covers all development proposals being considered against the NPPF. Agree to add in ‘Through the application of the sequential and exception test, as well as the guidance set out in NPPF, development should be located in areas of the lowest flood risk;’ as new criteria after a).
The accompanying text makes reference to encouraging a multi-functional approach to SuDS that enhances biodiversity as part of a green and blue infrastructure approach.

Support

Representation ID: 7617

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

We support the redevelopment of previously used land however the policy does not address the steps needed to assess and mitigate against possible contamination.
Much of this site lies over Lincolnshire Limestone (principal aquifer) and is located in Source Protection Zone 3. The previous use of this site as an army barracks could have caused potential contamination which may pose risk to groundwater or surface waters.
We would therefore suggest the below wording is added to the policy.
‘A preliminary risk assessment done by a suitably qualified person should be undertaken in accordance with ‘ Land Contamination Risk Management’ as the first stage of assessing any risk posed by land contamination. Groundwater is vulnerable to pollution from activities including discharge of effluents to ground from drainage storage of hazardous substances, and previous land use. The Environment Agency’s approach to groundwater protection provides information on how the Environment Agency will take a risk-based approach to regulate activities that may impact groundwater resources and to prevent and limit pollution.’

Comments noted. This is covered by Local Plan Policy SC4.

Object

Representation ID: 7618

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

This policy does not include sufficient detail to ensure adequate assessment of any risk posed by land contamination is completed to ensure groundwater is not affected by contamination. We therefore suggest the below wording is also added into this policy.

‘A preliminary risk assessment done by a suitably qualified person should be undertaken in accordance with ‘ Land Contamination Risk Management’ as the first stage of assessing any risk posed by land contamination. Groundwater is vulnerable to pollution from activities including discharge of effluents to ground from drainage storage of hazardous substances, and previous land use. The Environment Agency’s approach to groundwater protection provides information on how the Environment Agency will take a risk-based approach to regulate activities that may impact groundwater resources and to prevent and limit pollution.’

Comments noted. Criteria h) of Policy SS6 (now SS5) considers contamination of soil and groundwater from former uses of the site. Add in reference to Local Plan Policy SC4 that considers contamination in more detail.

Object

Representation ID: 7619

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

This policy does not include sufficient detail to ensure adequate assessment of any risk posed by land contamination is completed to ensure groundwater is not affected by contamination. We therefore suggest the below wording is also added into this policy.

‘A preliminary risk assessment done by a suitably qualified person should be undertaken in accordance with ‘ Land Contamination Risk Management’ as the first stage of assessing any risk posed by land contamination. Groundwater is vulnerable to pollution from activities including discharge of effluents to ground from drainage storage of hazardous substances, and previous land use. The Environment Agency’s approach to groundwater protection provides information on how the Environment Agency will take a risk-based approach to regulate activities that may impact groundwater resources and to prevent and limit pollution.’

Comments noted. Criteria g) of Policy SS7 (now SS6) considers contamination but, for consistency with Policy SS6 (now SS5) , reword g) to that used in Policy SS6 (now SS5) and add in criteria h) as worded in Policy SS6 (now SS5)

Object

Representation ID: 7620

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

This allocation has small areas of flood zones 2 and 3. Any development applications would need to be supported with a detailed site specific flood risk assessment which is in line with the NPPF and policy CC14 of the Local Plan.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 7621

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

This allocation has small areas of flood zones 2 and 3. Any development applications would need to be supported with a detailed site specific flood risk assessment which is in line with the NPPF and policy CC14 of the Local Plan.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 7622

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

This potential residential development is adjacent to an historic landfill site (Belvoir Close). This may have caused contamination at the site and these risks need to be assessed. We therefore recommend this historic landfill site is referred to in the text and the below wording is added into the policy.
‘A preliminary risk assessment done by a suitably qualified person should be undertaken in accordance with ‘ Land Contamination Risk Management’ as the first stage of assessing any risk posed by land contamination.’

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Support

Representation ID: 7623

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

We welcome the requirement that ‘development should minimise pollution and where possible contribute to the protection and improvement of the quality of air, land, and water’. We advise that this is secured through a Construction Environment Management Plan which outlines the mitigation measures and how these will manage potential impacts to water quality.

We also welcome the requirement within the policy that developments that would ‘lead to deterioration or may compromise the ability of a water body or underlying groundwater to meet good status standards required by the Water Framework Directive will not be permitted’.

We request that you add reference to our ‘Land contamination: Risk management’ guidance into the policy. This is available at Land contamination risk management (LCRM) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) Developers should use land contamination risk management (LCRM) to:
• identify and assess if there is an unacceptable risk
• assess what remediation options are suitable to manage the risk
• plan and carry out remediation
• verify that remediation has worked

Agree, add reference to Construction Environment Management Plans

Support

Representation ID: 7624

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Environment Agency

We request that the following is added into the policy to make it in line with a good example we have seen within the recently adopted Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.
‘Where development is proposed on a site which is known to be or has the potential to be affected by contamination, a preliminary risk assessment should be undertaken by the developer and submitted to the Local Planning Authority as the first stage in assessing the risk of contamination'.

Finally, the policy does not mention cemeteries. A high priority is placed on protecting groundwater within principal aquifers and groundwater catchments used for drinking water supply, and new larger cemetery developments in such areas might not be appropriate. It is therefore considered that reference should be made to this. More information is contained within the Environment Agency’s approach to groundwater protection.

Agree