Preamble
Residents of our district are deeply concerned about water quality and the impact ofregular wastewater discharge, which includes untreated sewage, into our local rivers and seas and the impact on wildlife and on human health. We know that there were 288 sewage storm overflow spills into our rivers, including the Stour, in 2021 for a total duration of 1,861 hours. That was from just the 18 storm overflows that are monitored. Another 17 storm overflows are not monitored. The Stour is widely used for swimming, boating and fishing. As the district’s population rises with new housing, releasing sewage into rivers is no longer an emergency-only situation occurring as a result of severe storms, but an everyday occurrence even in ‘normal’ rainfall.
Local and national planning policy requires a robust approach to both water quality and pollution. The National Planning Policy Framework* makes clear that it is Babergh Council’s responsibility to prevent developments causing unacceptable levels of water pollution. A recent legal opinion (attached as Appendix A) from the Environmental Law Firm clarifies that a local authority can consider the cumulative impact of developments on pollution and does not have to accept the view of the sewerage company. Yet it has not been the practice for Babergh planners to ask Anglian Water to report on cumulative impact i.e. whether or not development may lead to any potential increase in ‘emergency’ discharge into rivers and seas.
Motion
This Council resolves to:
1. Recognise the Council’s obligation to protect its rivers and seas, including from the cumulative impacts of pollution, in line with the National Planning Policy Framework*
2. Recognise that nationally there is clear evidence of deterioration of water quality due to cumulative impact of multiple sewage discharge events or ‘sewage overload’.
3. Ensure that in gathering evidence for future iterations of the local plan the council consider the cumulative impact of sewage when deciding the overall level of housing and other development.
4. Draw up a dashboard collating data on discharge so that the cumulative impact of wastewater discharge in the district can be easily seen.
5. The council will take a lead in protecting its watercourses from pollution, including by joining the relevant Catchment Partnership (such as Essex and East Suffolk) and working with other agencies to tackle this issue.
6. Ask the chair of the scrutiny committee to invite the Chief Executive of Anglian Water plus senior representatives from the Environment Agency and Natural England to attend a meeting to answer questions about plans for tackling levels of sewage discharge.
7. Ask Anglian Water, from this date onwards, in its planning consultation responses for major development, to clarify which treatment works will be managing the sewage; whether it has the information available to assess the impact on the number or duration of sewage discharges into local rivers or seas, and if it does have this information to share it (noting that this can only be requested not required).
8. Request that planning officers, from now onwards, include in all reports relating to major development a specific section on the impact on watercourses (in line with Core Strategy Policy CS15**), including the potential for the development to affect sewage outflow into watercourses (i.e. cumulative impact), or to flag if this information is not fully available, so that this information (or the lack of it) is clearly and transparently set out.
Proposer: Cllr Robert Lindsay
Seconder: Cllr Leigh Jamieson
*NPPF relevant policies
174 e states: “Planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:
preventing new and existing development from contributing to, being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability. Development should, wherever possible, help to improve local environmental conditions such as air and water quality, taking into account relevant information such as river basin management plans.”
185 notes that: “Planning policies and decisions should also ensure that new development is appropriate for its location taking into account the likely effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, living conditions and the natural environment, as well as the potential sensitivity of the site or the wider area to impacts that could arise from the development”;
(iii) Paragraph 186 provides that “Planning policies and decisions should sustain and contribute towards compliance with relevant limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and Clean Air Zones, and the cumulative impacts from individual sites in local areas” (emphasis added).
Core strategy relevant policies 2011-2031
**Policy CS15
xiii) minimise the demand for potable water in line with, or improving on
government targets, and ensure there is no deterioration of the status of thewater environment in terms of water quality, water quantity and physical characteristics;
3.3.7.7 Opportunities to improve water quality in all watercourses and water bodies will be taken where possible and measures will be taken to prevent the deterioration in current water quality standards. Site specific policies for allocated sites and detailed policies for delivering sustainable design and construction and climate resilient development will be set out in Site Allocations and Development Management Development Plans Documents (DPDs).
Minutes:
16.1 The Chair invited Councillor Lindsay to introduce and PROPOSE his motion as detailed in the agenda.
16.2 Councillor Lindsay explained his motion and informed council of an amendment to the recommendations.
16.3 Councillor Jamieson SECONDED the motion.
16.4 Councillor McCraw began the debate by discussing works undertaken at the Suffolk Flood Risk Management Scrutiny sub committee which he had been the council’s representative on for some time and supported the motion especially that a request be made to the Suffolk Flood Management Scrutiny Sub-Committee about development impact.
16.5 Councillors agreed to the sentiment of the motion but thought the recommendations needed clarification.
16.6 The Monitoring Officer gave councillors the option to use Rule 15.1d of the constitution that allows the council to move to refer a matter to the appropriate body or an individual, in this case this could be referred to officers to do further work before coming back to council with a more complete and rounded proposal.
By a vote of 18 votes for.
It was RESOLVED:
That in accordance with rule 15.1d of the Constitution this motion be referred to officers for clarification.
Supporting documents: