Agenda item - 21/02768/FP Oughton Head Pumping Station, Hitchin Road, Pirton, Hertfordshire

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Upgrade of existing pumping station to provide nitrate removal plant and equipment including change of use of land for operational purposes and all associated works.

RESOLVED: That application 21/02768/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions outlined in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, including an amendment to Condition 13 and the addition of Condition 14 as follows:

“Condition 13

Prior to commencement, a single method statement for the clearance of vegetation should be submitted to the LPA for consideration. This should incorporate the key considerations outlined in the mitigation measures for the safeguarding of hedgehogs, nesting birds and reptiles in sections 6.3. 6.4 and 6.5 of the Ecological Impact Assessment by SLR Consulting Limited (Ref: 402.06511.00007 Version No:2), including those relating to the time of year.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation

Condition 14

Prior to the commencement of the development a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved Plan.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation.”

Audio recording – 178 minutes 58 seconds

N.B. The Chair allowed a short break following the conclusion of Agenda Item 9.

The Planning Officer advised Members that Herts Ecology had provided their response and this had been shared with Members ahead of the meeting, but in summary no objections had been made.

The Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 21/02768/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The Chair invited Mr Alistair Gammell to speak against the application.

Mr Gammell thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation, including:

· As a keen conservationist and trout fisherman, he was interested in the conservation of chalk streams.

· Oughtonhead Common was the largest area of its type within Hertfordshire and was a well-used and much-loved site within the local community and is a local nature reserve, with priority habitat sites.

· Herts Ecology noted that without any evidence to the contrary, it is appropriate to be concerns about the possible negative impacts of the decisions on the wetlands and other wildlife habitats.

· All evidence suggests that there may be negative ecological effects on site and no consultees have suggested evidence that there will not be.

· Sites should enhance existing habitats and minimise impact from developments, with mitigations applied where appropriate.

· There is no evidence in the report that there will be a net biodiversity gain, given the losses expected to Oughtonhead Local Nature Reserve.

There were no points of clarification for Mr Gammell from Members and the Chair thanked him for his presentation.

The Chair invited Councillor Sam North to speak against the application as Member Advocate.

Councillor North thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and advised of the following:

· The development is proposing to extract high levels of water adjacent to this important natural habitat and recently the common has run dry, causing concern amongst local residents and users of the common.

· Only 200 chalk stream worldwide and 85% are found in England and are very rare habitats, supporting life both in and around the water.

· Due to the Climate Emergency declared by the Council this application should be rejected as this proposed water extraction will have an impact on the nature reserve and the special habitat it offers wildlife.

· The proposals transfer the water resilience in the area and would push the problem to another area in the district.

· These proposals, as noted in the report, would have an adverse impact on the green belt and further demonstrate reasons for refusal.

There were no points of clarification for Councillor North from Members and the Chair thanked him for his presentation.

The Chair invited Dr Ilias Karapanos and Ms Rebecca Lock, as the applicant and applicant’s representative, to speak in support of the application.

Ms Lock thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and advised of the following:

· This site is important part of Affinity Water strategic plans, agreed with the Environment Agency and Drinking Water Inspectorate.

· Current nitrate levels at Oughton mean that Affinity is currently unable to use this site and is therefore causing ‘unplanned outage’ on the system.

· The building is an extension of the existing site on Affinity Water land, and has been designed in common with other water treatment facilities and is not dissimilar to rural barns found in other locations.

· The building would not exacerbate urban sprawl and is not related to other developments.

· The need to provide safe and resilient water supplies outweighs the negatives of this proposal.

· Affinity Water have worked hard to address concerns from Officers and consultees to promote the benefits of the scheme and conditions have been placed on the proposals.

· There were no objections from District or County Councillors when consulted over recent months.

· Affinity has already been granted a licence to extract on the site and that is not for consideration with this proposal.

The following Members asked points of clarification:

· Councillor David Levett

· Councillor Tom Tyson

· Councillor Alistair Willoughby

· Councillor Nigel Mason

· Councillor Simon Bloxham

In response to points of clarification, Dr Ilias Karapanos advised:

· There are two levels of monitoring of extraction, one element is carried out by Affinity Water and they monitor the flow of the River Oughton to get a base line. The second element is carried out by the Environment Agency who will monitor trends in the wider area.

· The licence to extract water from the Environment Agency has been reviewed frequently since 1966.

· Water resilience revolves around not having single points of failure, to ensure that if there was an issue it could be managed by bringing in supply from elsewhere on the system. The unplanned outage on this site, caused by the increased nitrate levels, means there is less resilience in the system due to this site being offline.

· Graffam Water will continue to function and provide supply to some areas.

· Affinity Water was constantly looking at the environment and where licences can be removed if not necessary.

· They are allowed to extract 450 cubic metres per day of water for the purpose of augmentation on this site and when required and notified by the Environment Agency, Affinity Water will release up to this amount.

· The trigger for this action is based on the springs and set by the Environment Agency. The investigation took place from 1995 to 2000 and suggested the levels it should be and the trigger for taking actions.

· Baseline monitoring is not required of Affinity Water, but this is conducted as a goodwill gesture to help understand the impact.

· The drought in 2019 was when the water extraction at this site was off, therefore there must have been other factors in this happening.

· The site is only offline at the moment due to the nitrate levels being above the Drinking Water Inspectorate levels.

· Augmentation has been in place at Oughton Springs has been in place since 1996 offering key data for Affinity Water when monitoring the impact of extraction.

· Licences moving forward will be reviewed at a much more frequent rate than currently.

· Previous investigations into the chalk stream had been extensive and no issues were identified in these.

· By allowing the treatment of nitrates at this site, this water would be fed back into the system and would increase resilience.

In response to a point of clarification from the Chair, Councillor Val Bryant, Ms Lock advised that netting of the hedges on the site was to prevent birds nesting in the hedgerows so that if permission was granted work could be started immediately.

The Chair invited the Development and Conservation Manager to respond to points raised during the public and Member Advocate presentations and advised that Affinity Water have a licence and the nitrate levels are the only thing preventing the use of this licence. Additional conditions could be added which would look to mitigate against any ecological impact.

The following Members took part in the debate:

· Councillor Morgan Derbyshire

· Councillor Alistair Willoughby

· Councillor Simon Bloxham

Points raised in the debate included:

· The application had initially been rejected due to an objection from Highways, but they have now removed their concerns.

· There is already a licence to extract water on site and it would be difficult to reject this application because of that.

· Chalk streams are vitally important but in this instance, there seem to be sufficient safeguards applied to protect habitats.

In response to a question from Councillor David Levett the Development and Conservation Manager confirmed that this would not need to be referred to the Secretary of State, if approved by the Committee.

Councillor Morgan Derbyshire proposed and Councillor Alistair Willoughby seconded and, following a vote, it was: