Planning for Sustainable Development: Part 1

Interviewing the Environment Agency

"We are the leading public body for protecting and improving the environment in England and Wales. It's our job to make sure that air, land and water are looked after by everyone in today's society, so that tomorrow's generations inherit a cleaner, healthier world."

Sir John Harman, Chairman.

The Environment Agency (EA) was set up by the 1995 Environment Act and currently employs 10,500 staff with an annual budget of £650 million. As a non-departmental public body it is sponsored largely by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the National Assembly for Wales (NAW). It aims to provide high quality environmental protection and improvement in England and Wales through an emphasis on prevention and education, and then vigorous enforcement where necessary. It also claims to contribute towards the worldwide environmental goal of sustainable development, as defined by the Bruntland Commission.

The Environment Act of 1995 stated that the functions and duties of the EA were to include:

  • Compiling information on the pollution of the environment.
  • Assessing the effects of pollution of the environment.
  • Investigating the options for mitigating the effects of pollution.
  • Conservation of the beauty of land and waterways.
  • Maintenance of fisheries.
  • Carry out cost-benefit analysis when exercising its powers.
  • Conservation of water resources.

The EA is one of the most important environmental regulators in England and Wales. Its functions include the issuing of authorisations, giving advice, inspection and monitoring, and enforcement. The EA does not cover all aspects of environmental law and services to the public. Notable amongst the areas that it has no input include flooding from drains, sewers, streams or ditches; quality or supply of drinking water; and granting planning authority. These areas are the responsibility of the local authority, the local water company and the local planning authority respectively. This last point is particularly pertinent as it means that any objections it makes can be ignored by local planning authorities if so desired.

The Environment Agency and the West Stevenage Development

In a letter of September 17th 2001, the Environment Agency stated its objections to the proposed development for the following reasons:

Reason:Part of the development proposes a sewage storage tank at Elder Way Flood Storage Reservoir. This would jeopardise the flood storage potential of the reservoir. It may also create pollution.

Resolution:Relocate the sewage storage tank elsewhere.

It was noted that the objections were due to the temporary loss of flood storage capacity during the construction of the sewage storage tank; maintenance of the sewage storage tank and the provision of a pumping station causing a reduction in the storage capacity of the flood storage reservoir; and the covering of the sewage storage tank with water in times of flood. In this latter case, the concern was the risk of pollution due to either infiltration of flood water into the tank or structural collapse of the tank due to flood water pressure.

Reason:It is proposed to attenuate the discharge into the public surface water sewer system to a level of a 1 in 30 year storm. This is not acceptable to the Environment Agency.

This is due to the fact that the surface water sewer discharges into the Stevenage Brook. The Stevenage Brook and associated flood alleviation system throughout the town of Stevenage is exceeded on a regular basis. This is demonstrated by the Wychdale Flood Storage Reservoir - a statutory reservoir under the Reservoirs Act 1975 which is on the Stevenage Brook, being overtopped. This has occurred on a regular basis in the last decade. Any additional surface water discharge into this sytem would exacerbate the flood risk.

Resolution:Attenuate the surface water discharge into the public surface water sewer to a 1 in 100 year storm level.

These objections were later removed in a letter of October 2002 where they stated certain planning conditions that they should like to see met. These were in regard to the Elder Way Flood Storage Reservoir.

Condition:Engineering design details of the sewage storage tank at Elder Way, including the construction methods and program, and calculations regarding the anticipated hydrostatic pressures exerted on the storage tank at times of flood, should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The tank shall then only be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason:To prevent pollution of the water environment

Condition:Drawings of the proposed compensatory works for the construction of the tank at Elder Way, including calculations to prove that the mitigation is adequate in comparison to the amount of flood storage taken up during the construction and permanent phases, should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of construction. The compensatory works shall then be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason:To prevent the increased risk of flooding

Condition:The program of works for the construction of the tank, including details of the timing of the compensatory excavations and the sheet piling off of the dry working area should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the commencement of construction. The works shall then only be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason:To prevent the increased risk of flooding

Difficulty in the interview process.

Attempting to discuss the proposed West Stevenage development with employees of the Environment Agency was not an easy process. After initially contacting Andrew Yuill in the Planning Liaison Department we patiently awaited a response from him, yet none came. Chasing him up, we discovered that he had contacted several of those that had been involved in the assessment of aspects of the proposal. He had received three replies from his colleagues and he recommended that we contact them the following week. The CMI boardroom was booked for Tuesday 21st January to take advantage of the speakerphone facilities. The following sections summarise the interviews conducted.

Claire Francis – Development Control Engineer

Ms. Francis was willing to talk to us, but that particular time was inconvenient for her because she needed to produce an article for publication that afternoon. She suggested that we call her later in the week.

Ruth Shaw – Environmental Management Officer for Upper Lea (Part 1)

Ms. Shaw was aware that we would be calling at some point, but couldn’t immediately recollect the West Stevenage project. We found this surprising given the proposed size of the development. We were satisfied when she offered to read some of the documentation before we phoned her again in half an hour.

John Moore – Water Resources Manager

A mistyped telephone number didn’t stop us from getting in touch with Mr Moore! Like Ms. Shaw before him, he had great trouble remembering his involvement in the assessment of the West Stevenage development. Mr. Moore’s concerns had been centred on the lack of information given by the developers. He had requested information regarding how they were to meet water resources for the development and how they would affect local groundwater. He considered the concerns to be standard for any development, though were particularly prominent in this case due to the size of the proposed scheme.

Mr. Moore was able to elaborate on the nature of the EA itself. He explained that it was the Planning Liaison Office that received the planning application from the developers. Specific material was then distributed amongst the relevant departments by computer. For Mr. Moore, the West Stevenage Development had just been another case to assess. He had been able to use the standard responses used in the computer programme and there had been no need to customise his responses. This, he said, was to minimise the amount of work that was actually required. Once each section is complete they are passed back to the Planning Liaison department who produce a complete document detailing the concerns of each department. Mr. Moore explained that because he received so many different cases each week, it was difficult to actually remember any particular project, as was the case here. To me, this exemplifies the way that the EA operates: its employees often have little understanding of the bigger picture and are only used for the specific knowledge they possess.

Ruth Shaw – Environmental Management Officer for Upper Lea (Part 2)

The details of this interview are the subject of the report by Miss Valeria Bona and concerned the Elder Way Flood Storage Reservoir.

Conclusions

The Environment Agency is a vast organisation whose scope is wide-ranging and which operates by subdividing elements of assessment between specific departments. Its original attitude towards the West Stevenage development was one of opposition and it objected to the development largely due to concerns over the proposed Elder Way Water Storage Reservoir. However, following more detailed specifications from the developer, these objections were removed and replaced with conditions which it wished to see met. As the power to grant planning authority resides in the hands of local planning authorities, the EA has no ability to enforce these conditions, but it is likely that they would be enforced by the local planners in Stevenage Borough Council and North Hertfordshire District Council.

Simon Ford Planning for Sustainable Development: Part 1 Page 1