Interviews with:

·  Lee Dance, Head of Resource and Environmental at South East Water;

·  Rob Jarman, Head of Development Manager; and

·  Steve Clarke, Principle Planning Officer.

The Chairman welcomed Head of Development Management, Rob Jarman, Principal Planning Officer, Steve Clarke and Lee Dance Head of Resources and Environmental at South East Water.

Mr Jarman and Mr Clarke began with a presentation that set out the consultation process regarding the impact of new development on water supplies demand through the Local Development Framework and the development management process that seeks to ensure development that is approved uses water as efficiently as possible. They explained that this demand was managed through consultation with water providers; Southern Water for drainage and South East Water for capacity/supply. Mr Dance explained that South East Water had a Water Resource Management Plan which was a 25 year business plan that was regulated by Ofwat and reviewed every 5 years. Along with infrastructure requirements it took into consideration the number of houses, the location and the pace of investment and development.  Mr Dance explained that South East Water had a statutory requirement to provide water to new homes.

It was explained that climate change data showed that the south east was getting dryer with an increasing population and economic growth. The Code for Sustainable Homes, an environmental impact rating for housing in England in Wales which set the standard for energy efficiency, was explained to the Committee.  They were told Maidstone Borough Council had no policy that took them above Level 1 of the Code but that through negotiation they nearly always achieved Level 3. The Officers informed Members that they were one of the highest achieving local authorities since the scheme’s introduction in 2007 and they were the highest in Kent. Members were told that in the emerging Core Strategy policy requiring development to achieve a minimum Level 3 for the Code would be set. The government aspiration was that by 2016 all new dwellings would be carbon neutral, meeting water efficiency targets that would put them at level 5 or 6 in the Code. The same aspiration was set for public buildings by 2019. Members explored the area of water efficiency in developments further and were told that in major developments grey water recycling and rain water harvesting and SuDS drainage were often included and were given an example of a recently approved development at the television studios in Maidstone.  The Committee queried the water efficiency methods that were being introduced by the water companies and whether the aim was to introduce a water metre in every property.  They were told that South East Water supported the Code for Sustainable Homes and were working with Kent County Council. Mr Dance explained that South East Water were working with developers and on development in Ashford had provided a water efficiency ‘kit’ to prove the reliability of water saving methods. He explained that the kits used micro component modelling to understand water usage and how savings could be delivered through water saving shower heads and by using a half flush on toilets.  Members were told that the Secretary of State was in support of compulsory metres with 45% of households using metres at present, by 2015 this would be 70% and by 2020 it would be 90%. Maidstone would be included in year two of the programme which would make people aware of their usage. The assumption was that there would be a 10% reduction in water usage when customers went from unmeasured to a measured water supply.  In relation to the Code for Sustainable Homes it was established that Building Control were operating at a minimum level of 1 or 2 whilst Planning were aiming for Level 3.  In relation to this the Housing Associations who were seen to be leading the way in terms of the Code were not now going to be required to undertake their developments so that they meet Code Level 4 as originally envisaged from April 2011. Members were informed that this had been postponed by the Homes and Communities Agency. The cost to the developer was cited as a reason for the code remaining stagnant with profit margins being an issue.  Mr Jarman explained that in terms of s106 contributions that offset the impact of new development on existing services such as health care provision, Development Management held a realistic view as to the contributions requested by consultees a dn that in order to achieve higher levels under the Code for Sustainable Homes developers it may be necessary to reduce contributions elsewhere accordingly. 

The Committee moved on to the issue of Surface Water Flooding, an issue for Maidstone. Members were told that this was caused by poor maintenance with debris and leaves blocking rainwater drains. The Committee were informed that under the 1976 Act Maidstone was a land drainage authority but ditches remained the responsibility of the land owner with the authority having the power to have them cleaned up.  Members explored the possibility of surface water flooding being an opportunity for the water supplier to consider its diminishing future supply.  Mr Dance explained that currently this was the responsibility of Southern Water but agreed that effluent waste water could be reused and was an option South East Water had timetabled to consider post 2030.  He explained that there were other, less carbon intensive processes to consider.  Members were keen for South East Water to consider initiatives in this area and if necessary generate initiatives to work with Southern Water.  Mr Dance emphasised that at present South East Water had no remit or power in areas such as drainage as a supplier but that metering was a cost effective option that they were pursuing.

Mr Jarman explained the methods Development Management were using in terms of tackling surface water flooding. The Government had changed ‘permitted development rights’ relating to the creation of hardstanding areas on garden areas fronting a highway requiring all areas of 5sqm or more to be paved with a porous material or drain into a permeable or porous area on the property. Members felt that this was something that could be emphasised and communicated to the public via the website. The Officer went on to explain the benefit of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) which he said could enhance a development as well as providing opportunities for water efficiency, design features and tackling environmental issues.  With regard to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, the Committee were advised that Kent County Council would be the SuDs authority but that the regulations had not been released so the Officers were not yet aware what Maidstone Borough Council’s responsibilities would be.  They explained that volume house builders would be prevented from linking up to the mains drainage system.  The option would not always be SuDS but it was the option preferred by Southern Water.  Members were told that conditions surrounding this issue would be sent out with the Planning decision.  Mr Jarman confirmed they would be looking at the SuDs option first.  Members highlighted the Local Development Framework which would span a large timescale and recommended that this needed to be included within it.  The Officer explained that it was not mandatory and in some cases there would be no problem using the mains drainage system.  The Committee were told that the use of SuDs would be evidence based.  Mr Dance returned to the point made regarding recycling effluent water in relation to drainage and SuDs.  He explained that a system was required that could deliver during dry periods and that could also manage rain water.  The two issues were providing a flood asset and also a supply.  He articulated that if you were providing a flood asset you would want it to remain empty.  Members questioned the way in which the water supply was preserved in terms of repairs to the infrastructure.  Mr Dance explained that South East were governed on this by industry wide regulations.

Mr Jarman explained to the Committee how matters would be taken forward. The Kent County Council Surface Water Flood Team along with Maidstone Borough Council would be refreshing the strategic flood risk assessment.  With regard to SuDs schemes, pre-application discussions would take place with developers and KCC to create an early dialogue regarding the cost and to provide the developer some certainty in the development process. The Officer agreed that the scheme had a place in the Core Strategy but that the details for SuDs would come in a more detailed, land allocations document, as it was site specific.  The Core Strategy was an ‘umbrella’ document.’

The Committee expressed their thanks to the witnesses for all the information gleaned but felt that there remained a great deal of unanswered questions, particularly with reference to the water companies not working together.  Members reiterated their concerns regarding new development; 10,080 in Maidstone and 100,000 across the county, putting further pressure on a system already stressed by the amount of water consumed.  Mr Dance explained that new housing meant more water efficiency and directed the Committee to the 36 page summary document of South East Water’s Water Resource Management Plan which would show reassuring forecasts in line with the efficiency methods discussed.

It was resolved that Requirements for Sustainable Drainage Systems should be included in the Land Allocation document.