Policy DM36: Sustainable Drainage
Comment
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 293
Received: 01/10/2013
Respondent: Essex County Council
Under the Flood and Water Management Act (2010) Essex County Council is the Lead Local Flood Authority responsible for managing the risk of flooding from surface water flood risk; groundwater and ordinary watercourses (local flood risk). Essex County Council seeks amendments to the proposed standards a - Quality and c - Quality.
Amendments requested to policy and supporting text.
See attached
Object
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 579
Received: 02/10/2013
Respondent: Hansteen Holdings Plc
Agent: McGough Planning Consultants
Hansteen support this policy insofar as it is consistent with the "Technical Guidance to the NPPF". Table 1 of the Guidance sets out the instances where FRAs are required. In the case of Flood Zone 1 areas (like the industrial estates in West Horndon) it suggests a brief form of FRA is appropriate, unless the local considerations indicate otherwise. Hansteen seeks clarification of the factors that have resulted in the draft plan not accepting the advice given in the Technical Guidance.
See attached
Comment
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 627
Received: 23/09/2013
Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council
No mention of the Chelmsford Flood Alleviation scheme appears in this policy.
See attachments
Support
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 830
Received: 02/10/2013
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Barton Willmore
We support the principle of SuDs drainage and would emphasise that the preliminary drainage strategy for Officers Meadows has been designed accordingly.
See attached
Support
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 868
Received: 26/09/2013
Respondent: Environment Agency
Supportive of this policy to promote use of SuDS following the preferred hierarchy of surface water drainage. Supporting text notes that sewage infrastructure in the north of the Borough is at full capacity, so we support standard 'e. redeveloped brownfield sites should disconnect any surface water drainage from the foul network.'
However, we recommend a more positive description is given to the benefits afforded by the Water Framework Directive in para 4.166. While some water bodies have been heavily modified and may never revert entirely back to their natural state, the Directive still aims that they achieve good ecological potential.
See attached
Support
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 878
Received: 26/09/2013
Respondent: Anglian Water
We are particularly supportive of Policies DM35: Flood Risk, DM36: Sustainable Drainage.
See attached
Object
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 949
Received: 01/10/2013
Respondent: Thames Water
Agent: Savills UK
Thames Water have concerns regarding the wording of Policy DM36 which does not require developers to follow the sequential approach for the disposal of surface water. The policy should set out a clear hierarchy for the management of surface water to be followed by developers if it is to be effective rather than setting out a preferred hierarchy.
See attached
Comment
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 1291
Received: 01/10/2013
Respondent: Mr Richard Romang
There seems to be a total disregard for SuDs or surface water harvesting in the development of drives at the front of properties. I have seen many lawns and planting beds removed from the front of properties to be replaced by block paved drives which do not appear to take drainage into consideration. We already have regular flooding issues in Blackmore and little control over the creation of hard standing areas. I would like to see more focus on surface water drainage and SuDs legislation relating to small development in the LDP
see attached document
Comment
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 1916
Received: 24/10/2013
Respondent: Historic England
Sustainable drainage systems should take account of potential impacts on heritage assets, especially undesignated archaeology that may be harmed by excavation for water storage or, in the case of organic remains, by changes in the water table.
See attached