Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
7 Consultation response to the Draft Regional Water Resources Plan for Eastern England PDF 309 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Matter for
Decision
The report referred
to a joint consultation response with South Cambridgeshire District Council to
Water Resources East (WRE) who were consulting upon their first full draft
Regional Water Resources Plan.
Decision of the
Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure
i.
Agreed the consultation response to be sent jointly
with South Cambridgeshire District Council set out in Appendix 1 of the
Officer’s report and that this should be sent to Water Resources East.
ii.
Agreed that any subsequent material amendments be
agreed by the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure (in
consultation with respective Chairs and Spokes).
Reason for the
Decision
As set out in the
Officer’s report.
Any Alternative
Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny
Considerations
The Committee
received a report from the Principal Planning Policy
Officer.
In response to
Member’s questions the Principal Planning Policy Officer, Planning Policy
Manager and Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development said the
following:
i.
The
draft WRE plan looks at reductions in abstraction with short term measures to
prevent further deterioration of the environment and longer-term measures to
enhance the environment.
ii.
To
address the impact of the current development; a change was needed in where the
water was taken in the longer term and how Cambridge Water with external
partners would manage that transition. This was not just a Cambridge specific
problem but an issue across the East of England.
iii.
Officers
would be working with the Environment Agency looking at ways to improve
integrated water management across the region with an understanding on how
water planning could be improved for future use.
iv.
Officers
would be willing to address the water issues with surrounding local authorities
as this was not a single location issue.
v.
Officers
were also exploring what could be done locally, engaging with the Lead Local
Flood Authority regarding surface water management, which might enable better
recharge of the aquifer through slower runoff rates to improve infiltration.
vi.
Officers
would continue to address water management while working with local partners to
improve the conditions of the chalk streams locally.
vii.
The
Water Company Water Resource Management Plans should set out a strategy for the
plan period. The plans would then go to
the water regulator to look at the cost to the consumer.
viii.
The
scrutiny committee was not the forum for considering the Equality Impact
Assessment, this was for the regulator to make comment.
The Executive
Councillor stated that the chalk streams were not adequately protected. The
Ecology Officers were exploring the possibility whether the chalk streams could
get international recognition under the Ramsar Convention through an
application.
The Water Resources
East Board stated that the Water Resources Management Plan should be at an
‘enhanced’ level not a business-as-usual plan, this was a late decision from
the Board.
The Committee
The Committee
unanimously endorsed the Officer recommendations.
The Executive
Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of
Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted).
No conflicts of interest were declared by the
Executive Councillor.