South Worcestershire Water Cycle Study 2012 Update

Transcription

1 South Worcestershire Water Cycle Study 2012 Update Final Addendum Report May 2013 Malvern Hills District Council Council House Avenue Road MALVERN Worcestershire WR14 3AF

2 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc i

3 JBA Project Manager David Kearney Magna House South Street Atherstone Warwickshire CV9 1DN Revision History Revision Ref / Date Issued Amendments Issued to Draft Version 1 (November 2012) Final Version 1 (May 2013) Rosie Murray (Malvern Hills District Council) Fred Davies (Wychavon District Council) Ann Cooper (Worcester City Council) Ruth Clare (Environment Agency) Elizabeth Murphy (Malvern Hills District Council) Fred Davies (Wychavon District Council) Ann Cooper (Worcester City Council) Ruth Clare (Environment Agency) Contract This Water Cycle Study Update is commissioned by Malvern Hills District Council, Wychavon District Council and Worcester City Council. The councils' representative for the contract was Fred Davies. Claire Gardner, Matthew Roberts and David Kearney of JBA Consulting carried out this work. Prepared by... Matthew Roberts BSc MSc DIC Assistant Analyst...Claire Gardner BSc MSc FRGS Analyst Reviewed by... Paul Eccleston BA CertWEM CEnv MCIWEM C.WEM Principal Analyst 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc ii

4 Purpose This document has been prepared as a Final Addendum Report for Malvern Hills District Council, Wychavon District Council and Worcester City Council. JBA Consulting accepts no responsibility or liability for any use that is made of this document other than by the Client for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc iii

5 Acknowledgements JBA Consulting would like to thank Fred Davies and Jessica Woolley of Wychavon District Council, Ruth Clare and Kate Morris of the Environment Agency, and Peter Davies and Dawn Williams of Severn Trent Water for their assistance with this project. Copyright Jeremy Benn Associates Limited 2013 Carbon Footprint 462g A printed copy of the main text in this document will result in a carbon footprint of 363g if 100% post-consumer recycled paper is used and 462g if primary-source paper is used. These figures assume the report is printed in black and white on A4 paper and in duplex. JBA is aiming to achieve carbon neutrality. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc iv

6 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc i

7 Executive Summary JBA Consulting was originally commissioned in October 2008 to undertake a Water Cycle Study (WCS) for South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy which included the areas of Malvern Hills District Council, Worcester City Council, and Wychavon District Council. This Water Cycle Study update is based on the South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options (September 2011) and Proposed Significant Changes to the Preferred Options plan (August 2012). This is consistent with the 2012 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment update. The South Worcestershire Councils have since published the South Worcestershire Development Plan: Proposed Submission Document in January 2013 and some sites that have been assessed as part of this Water Cycle Study have not been taken forward into the South Worcestershire Development Plan. Since the previous WCS, there have been a number of changes to the planning system including the Localism Act (2011) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) with accompanying Technical Guidance. In addition, some policies relating to water supply and sewerage have emerged or been updated, as well as supporting documents. The Localism Act and the proposed revocation of the Regional Spatial Strategies provided the opportunity for the three South Worcestershire councils to closely re-examine the local evidence base and establish their own local development requirements for employment, housing and other land uses through the plan making process. As such, although there has been no change with the overall development strategy, there have been a number of changes to the allocation sites, with some sites removed, additional sites included and modifications to some sites, and therefore an update to the WCS is required to provide supporting evidence for these changes. As much of the 2010 Water Cycle Study is still relevant, this 2012 Update has been provided as an Addendum Report to the existing study, with the intention that both documents should be used side by side. A review of legislation, policy and supporting documents has been undertaken to determine any policy changes or updated/new documents that are relevant to the WCS. A summary of the 2010 WCS has also been provided, highlighting where the 2010 study is still applicable and areas where this 2012 Update supersedes information. The majority of information in the 2010 WCS is still considered applicable. However, some of the information in the following chapters is superseded by this 2012 Update. Chapter 3: Development Scenarios and Key Developments. o This chapter is now completely superseded by Section 4 of this 2012 Update Chapter 4: Wastewater Collection and Treatment o A lot of the information in this chapter is still applicable. However, the assessment of the impact of proposed allocation sites on sewerage infrastructure and sewage treatment works are superseded by Section 5 of this 2012 Update Chapter 5: Water Resources and Supply o A lot of the information in this chapter is still applicable although the proposed allocation sites have changed since the 2010 study. However Severn Trent Water have confirmed the situation remains the same with all sites in the amber category meaning investment would be required to accommodate the proposed allocations and an estimated 12 months required for upgrade. Section 6 of this 2012 Update provides more information of the water supply assessment for the SWDP proposed allocations Chapter 7: Flood Risk Management o This chapter was based on the 2009 South Worcestershire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. Since the original 2010 WCS was published there has been an update to the South Worcestershire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, undertaken in 2012, which has used updated mapping to assess the SWDP proposed allocation sites. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc ii

8 As a result, this Chapter has now been completed superseded and the 2012 South Worcestershire Level 2 SFRA Update should be used when looking at flood risk in South Worcestershire Summary of wastewater collection and treatment, and water resources assessments The review of the 2010 Water Cycle Study showed that the majority of the main findings still stand and are applicable today. However, an update was required to assess changes to the SWDP allocation sites, where some sites were removed, additional sites included and modifications to some sites. Severn Trent Water provided a broadscale assessment of the proposed site allocations likely impact on wastewater and water supply infrastructure. At this stage, with no detailed plans of the sites, it is not possible for STW to undertake hydraulic modelling or provide more detailed assessment or costing. Details of this assessment are provided in Sections 5 and 6. The analysis in the 2010 WCS and this 2012 Update takes a demand based approach and therefore growth comes with some hidden costs, partly met through water bills. Resourcebased planning would be an alternative approach. However, South Worcestershire is a waterscarce region within no water available or over-abstracted categories, which might mean restricting development. Conclusions and recommendations Sewerage infrastructure Many of the proposed site allocations will require investment in the sewerage infrastructure and the solutions and costs will need to be reassessed after the final allocations and dwelling numbers are confirmed. Sewerage infrastructure capacity improvements are usually initiated once a developer agrees to fund the required improvements and would normally take up to 12 months to complete. If more detailed information is made available regarding the plans for the development sites then this can be used to determine the additional foul flow required for treatment and consequently several notional schemes can be drafted to improve the sewerage infrastructure with estimated costs and storage volumes. It is recommended that hydraulic modelling is carried out in order to improve the accuracy of these estimates and to gain a better understanding of the change in DWF and the impact the proposed developments could have on local sub-catchments. In lieu of consent references and conditions for all the sewage treatment works, an analysis was been undertaken investigating the Water Framework Directive (WFD) condition of the receiving watercourses. The results of the assessment showed the majority of the receiving water bodies are classed as moderate overall WFD status, with a small number classed as poor and one classed as bad. Whilst an indication of possible phasing of sites has been provided, this is based on a broad scale assessment of sewerage infrastructure alone and does not include assessment of additional capacity requirements at sewage treatment works or ecological status of receiving waterbodies. The phasing of sites is uncertain and gaps in the data will require investigating before sites can be brought forward. Water resource and supply Investment will be required to the water supply infrastructure for it to be able to accommodate the proposed site allocations. Severn Trent Water have confirmed an allocation of funding has been identified to meet the cost of schemes to reinforce areas affected by development in the South Worcestershire area, based on a STW internal review carried out to identify investment needs for the remainder of the current AMP and for the next AMP covering Any site specific upgrades to the water supply infrastructure will be expected to be funded by developer contribution. Demand management options are a vital consideration when planning and building the new developments to provide sustainability both in terms of the aquatic environment and water supply. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc iii

9 Policy When the next cycle of CAMS is published in 2013, this report may require updating to reflect any chances. WATER RESOURCES POLICY All new development units will be restricted to a maximum water usage of 105 litres/person/day for indoor potable water and 5% of units within a development will be required to achieve a maximum water usage of 90 litres/person/day for indoor potable water. Rainwater Harvesting and/or Greywater Recycling systems will be a requirement for all new development units. An important constraint to development in the South Worcestershire that has been identified in the 2010 WCS and this 2012 Update is the scarcity of water resources and the limited abstraction licences available. A Greywater Recycling Policy was developed, in conjunction with the South Worcestershire Councils, for the 2010 WCS to limit the impact of the proposed site allocations on the water resources. This policy is still considered applicable to the South Worcestershire area and it is recommended the policy should remain. In addition to the water resource policy carried forward from the previous Water Cycle Study, it is recommended an additional policy relating to non-sewered areas should be implemented by the South Worcestershire councils. NON-SEWERED AREAS POLICY Proposed development in non-sewered areas should undergo a full assessment of the suitability of any proposals for non-main sewerage systems at the project design stage, as laid out in Circular 3/99. It is recommended that an additional policy relating to water quality should be implemented. Severn Trent Water have provided a statement showing they will complete necessary improvements to provide additional capacity once they have sufficient confidence the development will go ahead, and that they will ensure their assets have no adverse effect on the environment. Developers should liaise closely with Severn Trent Water and the Environment Agency to ensure the appropriate infrastructure is in place to ensure no detrimental impact on receiving water bodies. WATER QUALITY POLICY Developers should work with Severn Trent Water and the Environment Agency to ensure that the sewage treatment works has the capacity to accept additional dwellings without having a detrimental impact on the quality and/or quantity on the receiving water body or bodies. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc iv

10 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc i

11 Contents Executive Summary... ii Abbreviations and Glossary of Terms... 2 Development Allocation Reference Guide Introduction About this report Water Cycle Study objectives Report user guide Approach Consultation Changes to legislation National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Flood and Water Management Act (2010) Localism Act South Worcestershire Development Plan Water White Paper: Water for Life (2011) Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies Final Severn Water Resources Management Plan (2010) Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) Overview of 2010 Water Cycle Study Summary Chapter 2 Data collection and methodology Chapter 3 Development scenarios and key developments Chapter 4 Wastewater collection and treatment Chapter 5 Water resources and supply Chapter 6 Water quality and environmental issues Chapter 7 Flood Risk Management Chapter 8 Demand Management Chapter 9 Conclusions Overview of future development Extent and type of development Review of future development Windfall sites Wastewater collection and treatment Introduction Site Assessments Foul drainage provision in non-sewered areas Constraints and limitations Conclusions Recommendations Water resources and supply Introduction Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies (CAMS) Assessment of water supply availability for sites proposed in the SWDP Constraints and limitations Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH) Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions, recommendations and policy Summary of work undertaken Conclusions and recommendations s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

12 Contents 7.3 Policy Appendices... I A Proposed HOF strategies in the Warwickshire Avon catchment... III B Individual SWDP site allocation impact on sewerage infrastructure... V C Severn Trent Water statement... VII 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

13 List of Figures Figure 1-1: Water Cycle Study extent... 4 Figure 4-1: Worcester Allocations Figure 4-2: Droitwich Allocations Figure 4-3: Evesham Allocations Figure 4-4: Malvern Allocations Figure 4-5: Pershore Allocations Figure 4-6: Tenbury Wells Allocations Figure 4-7: Upton upon Severn Allocations List of Tables Table 1-1: SFRA chapters and contents... 2 Table 2-1: Worcestershire Middle Severn catchment abstraction restrictions... 9 Table 2-2: Severn Vale catchment abstraction restrictions... 9 Table 2-3: Teme catchment abstraction restrictions Table 2-4: Proposed Hands-Off Flow Strategies Table 2-5: Severn (WRZ3) Target headroom requirements (Ml/d) Table 4-1: Dwelling and employment land requirements between 2006 and Table 5-1: Summary of the impacts of the new site allocations Table 5-2: Recommended phasing classes for proposed development sites Table 5-3: Results of the STW assessment for each site* Table 5-4: Current consent references for each site and consent conditions* Table 5-5: Development sites, sewage treatment works and WFD status of receiving water bodies Table 6-1: Resource Availability Status Categories Table 6-2: Water Resources Availability (taken from 2010 WCS Report) Table 6-3: 2010 Water Cycle Strategy - Summary of Investment required to the Water Supply Infrastructure s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

14 Abbreviations and Glossary of Terms AMP AP BOD CAMS CfSHs CIRIA Cumecs Defra DO DPD DWF Term EA EU FFT Flood Risk Regulations Definition Asset Management Plan Assessment Point Biological Oxygen Demand Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy Code for Sustainable Homes Construction Industry Research and Information Association The cumec is a measure of flow rate. One cumec is shorthand for cubic metre per second; also m 3 /s (m 3 s 1). Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Deployable Output Development Plan Documents Dry Weather Flow is the wastewater flow in a sewer system during dry weather conditions with minimum infiltration. Environment Agency European Union Flows that exceed the design flow for full treatment Transposition of the EU Floods Directive into UK law. The EU Floods Directive is a piece of European Community (EC) legislation to specifically address flood risk by prescribing a common framework for its measurement and management. Floods and Water Part of the UK Government's response to Sir Michael Pitt's Report on Management Act (FWMA) the Summer 2007 floods, the aim of which is to clarify the legislative framework for managing surface water flood risk in England. Fluvial Flooding Flooding resulting from water levels exceeding the bank level of a main river FRA Flood Risk Assessment - A site specific assessment of all forms of flood risk to the site and the impact of development of the site to flood risk in the area. FRM Flood Risk Management FZ Flood Zones Ha Hectare HOF Hands Off Flow JBA Jeremy Benn Associates LDDs Local Development Documents LDF Local Development Framework LFRMS Local Food Risk Management Strategy LLFA Lead Local Flood Authority - Local Authority responsible for taking the lead on local flood risk management LPA Local Planning Authority maod metres Above Ordnance Datum Main River A watercourse shown as such on the Main River Map, and for which the Environment Agency has responsibilities and powers MHDC Malvern Hills District Council NFCDD National Flood and Coastal Defence Database NPPF National Planning Policy Framework NRD National Receptor Dataset a collection of risk receptors produced by the Environment Agency Ordinary Watercourse All watercourses that are not designated Main River. Local Authorities or, where they exist, IDBs have similar permissive powers as the Environment Agency in relation to flood defence work. However, the riparian owner has the responsibility of maintenance. OS NGR Ordnance Survey National Grid Reference P Phosphate PE Population equivalent (in waste-water monitoring and treatment) refers to the amount of oxygen-demanding substances whose oxygen consumption during biodegradation equals the average oxygen demand of the waste water produced by one person. PFRA Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

15 Term Pitt Review PPG PPS25 Q90 RAG Resilience Measures Resistance Measures Risk Return Period SAB Sewer flooding SHLAA SFRA SS Stakeholder STW SUDS Surface water flooding SWDP WCC WCS WDC WFD WRMP WRPG WRZ Definition Comprehensive independent review of the 2007 summer floods by Sir Michael Pitt, which provided recommendations to improve flood risk management in England. Planning Policy Guidance superseded by the NPPF Planning and Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk Q90 flow is used as a low flow indice. Flow is at least the stated value for 90% of the time. Red Amber Green classification; traffic light approach. Measures designed to reduce the impact of water that enters property and businesses; could include measures such as raising electrical appliances. Measures designed to keep flood water out of properties and businesses; could include flood guards for example. In flood risk management, risk is defined as a product of the probability or likelihood of a flood occurring, and the consequence of the flood. Is an estimate of the interval of time between events of a certain intensity or size, in this instance it refers to flood events. It is a statistical measurement denoting the average recurrence interval over an extended period of time. SUDS Approval Body - responsible for approving, adopting and maintaining drainage plans and SUDS schemes that meet the National Standards Flooding caused by a blockage or overflowing in a sewer or urban drainage system. Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment - The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) is a technical piece of evidence to support the Core Strategy and Sites & Policies Development Plan Documents (DPDs). Its purpose is to demonstrate that there is a supply of housing land in the District which is suitable and deliverable. Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Suspended Solids A person or organisation affected by the problem or solution, or interested in the problem or solution. They can be individuals or organisations, includes the public and communities. Severn Trent Water Sustainable Drainage Systems - Methods of management practices and control structures that are designed to drain surface water in a more sustainable manner than some conventional techniques Flooding as a result of surface water runoff as a result of high intensity rainfall when water is ponding or flowing over the ground surface before it enters the underground drainage network or watercourse, or cannot enter it because the network is full to capacity, thus causing what is known as pluvial flooding. South Worcestershire Development Plan Worcester City Council Water Cycle Study Wychavon District Council Water Framework Directive Water Resource Map Water Resources and Policy Group Water Resource Zone 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

16 Development Allocation Reference Guide This Water Cycle Study update is based on the South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options (September 2011) and Proposed Significant Changes to the Preferred Options plan (August 2012). This is consistent with the 2012 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment update. The South Worcestershire Councils have since published the South Worcestershire Development Plan: Proposed Submission Document in January 2013 and some sites that have been assessed as part of this Water Cycle Study have not been taken forward into the South Worcestershire Development Plan. The proposed allocation reference numbers have changed in the Proposed Submission Document from the original preferred options. The table below provides a reference for the original and new reference codes. Original allocation reference SWDP13/1 SWDP13/10 SWDP13/11 SWDP13/12 SWDP13/13 SWDP13/2 SWDP13/3 SWDP13/4 SWDP13/5 SWDP13/6 SWDP13/7 SWDP13/8 SWDP13/9 SWDP14 SWDP15 SWDP16 SWDP17 SWDP20/1 SWDP21/1 SWDP23/1 SWDP23/10 SWDP23/11 SWDP23/12 SWDP23/13 SWDP23/14 SWDP23/15 SWDP23/16 SWDP23/17 SWDP23/2 SWDP23/3 SWDP23/4 SWDP23/5 SWDP23/6 SWDP23/7 SWDP23/9 SWDP24/1 SWDP24/2 SWDP24/3 SWDP24/5 SWDP24/6 SWDP25/1 SWDP25/2 MHHA14 MALVERN HILLS DISTRICT 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc New allocation reference SWDP52/1 SWDP52/7 SWDP52/8 No longer in plan No longer in plan SWDP52/2 No longer in plan SWDP52/3 No longer in plan SWDP52/4 SWDP52/5 SWDP52/6 No longer in plan SWDP53 SWDP54 SWDP55 SWDP56 SWDP57/1 SWDP58/1 SWDP59/1 SWDP59/59 SWDP59/10 SWDP59/11 SWDP59/12 SWDP59/12 SWDP60/6 SWDP60/7 SWDP60/8 SWDP59/2 SWDP59/3 SWDP59/4 SWDP59/6 SWDP59/7 SWDP59/8 SWDP59/8 SWDP60/1 SWDP60/2 SWDP60/3 No longer in plan SWDP60/5 SWDP61/1 SWDP60/4 SWDP59/5

17 Original allocation reference MHKY33 MHPW06 MHTH10 MHTW14 MHWD10 SWDP6/1 SWDP6/10 SWDP6/11 SWDP6/12 SWDP6/13 SWDP6/14 SWDP6/15 SWDP6/16 SWDP6/17 SWDP6/18 SWDP6/19 SWDP6/2 SWDP6/20 SWDP6/21 SWDP6/22 SWDP6/23 SWDP6/3 SWDP6/4 SWDP6/5 SWDP6/6 SWDP6/7 SWDP6/8 SWDP6/9 6/NEWA 6/NEWB 6/NEWC 6/NEWD 6/NEWE 6/NEWF 6/NEWH 6/NEWI 6/NEWJ SWDP7/2 SWDP7/3 SWDP7/4 SWDP7/5 SWDP7/6 SWDP8/1 SWDP8/2 SWDP8/3 SWDP8/4 SWDP8/5 WO93 WORCESTER CITY New allocation reference SWDP59/8 SWDP59/12 SWDP58 SWDP57/2 SWDP59/13 SWDP43/1 SWDP43/6 SWDP43/7 SWDP43/13 SWDP43/14 SWDP43/15 SWDP43/16 No longer in plan SWDP43/18 SWDP43/22 SWDP43/24 SWDP43/2 SWDP43/25 SWDP43/26 SWDP43/27 SWDP43/28 SWDP43/21 SWDP43/19 SWDP43/3 SWDP43/4 SWDP43/5 No longer in plan No longer in plan SWDP43/8 SWDP43/5 SWDP43/11 SWDP43/9 SWDP43/10 SWDP43/12 SWDP43/20 SWDP43/23 SWDP43/23 SWDP44/2 SWDP44/3 SWDP44/4 SWDP44/5 SWDP44/6 SWDP45/1 SWDP45/2 SWDP45/3 SWDP45/4 SWDP45/5 SWDP43/29 WYCHAVON DISTRICT SWDP60/ Unknown SWDP10 SWDP49/1 SWDP11/1 SWDP50/1 SWDP11/3 SWDP51/1 SWDP11/4 SWDP50/ SWDP61/2 SWDP12/1 SWDP51/1 SWDP12/2 SWDP51/2 SWDP12/3 SWDP51/3 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

18 Original allocation reference 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc New allocation reference 14/10/2014 No longer in plan SWDP18/1 SWDP46/1 SWDP18/2 SWDP46/2 SWDP18/3 SWDP46/3 SWDP18/4 SWDP46/5 SWDP18/6 No longer in plan SWDP18/7 SWDP46/5 SWDP19/1 SWDP47/1 SWDP19/2 SWDP47/2 SWDP20/2 SWDP57/3 2012SC SWDP49/2 SWDP23/18 SWDP59/14 SWDP23/19 SWDP59/15 SWDP23/20 No longer in plan SWDP23/22 SWDP59/17 SWDP23/23 SWDP59/18 SWDP23/24 SWDP59/19 SWDP23/25 SWDP59/20 SWDP23/26 SWDP59/21 SWDP23/27 No longer in plan SWDP23/29 SWDP59/22 SWDP23/30 SWDP59/23 SWDP23/31 No longer in plan SWDP23/32 SWDP59/24 SWDP23/33 SWDP59/25 SWDP23/34 SWDP59/26 SWDP23/35 No longer in plan SWDP23-07 SWDPUnknown SWDP24/10 SWDP60/13 SWDP24/11 No longer in plan SWDP24/13 No longer in plan SWDP24/14 SWDP60/15 SWDP24/16 SWDP60/16 SWDP24/17 SWDP60/17 SWDP24/18 SWDP60/18 SWDP24/19 SWDP60/19 SWDP24/21 SWDP60/21 SWDP24/22 SWDP60/22 SWDP24/23 SWDP60/23 SWDP24/24 SWDP60/26 SWDP24/25 SWDP61/14 SWDP24/26 SWDP61/15 SWDP24/27 SWDP60/28 SWDP24/7 SWDP60/9 SWDP24/8 SWDP60/11 SWDP24/9 No longer in plan SWDP61/3 SWDP25/10 SWDP61/11 SWDP25/11 SWDP61/12 SWDP25/4 SWDP61/4 SWDP25/6 SWDP61/7 SWDP25/8 SWDP61/9 SWDP25/9 SWDP61/ No longer in plan SWDP61/6 27-N21 SWDP50/5 29wy-02 SWDP59/ SWDP60/14 37-N03 SWDP50/6 37-N16 SWDP50/7

19 Original allocation reference New allocation reference 37-N17 No longer in plan SWDP60/ SWDP61/ Unknown SWDP60/ Unknown Unknown No longer in plan SWDP9/1 SWDP48/1 SWDP9/2 No longer in plan SWDP9/3 SWDP48/2 SWDP9/4 SWDP48/3 SWDP9/5 SWDP48/4 SWDP9/6 SWDP48/5 SWDP9/7 SWDP48/6 LP1 SWDP60/12 SWDP*A SWDP2 SWDP VPx SWDP51/3 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

20 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc

21 1 Introduction 1.1 About this report The South Worcestershire Water Cycle Study (WCS) 2012 Update is an addendum report to the existing South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy Water Cycle Study, September This addendum report has been prepared to update, where applicable, the work that was included in the previous WCS and provide appropriate supporting evidence for the South Worcestershire Development Plan (SWDP). Since the previous WCS, there have been a number of changes to the planning system including the Localism Act (2011) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) with accompanying Technical Guidance. In addition, some policies relating to water supply and sewerage have emerged or been updated, as well as supporting documents. The Localism Act and the proposed revocation of the Regional Spatial Strategies provided the opportunity for the three South Worcestershire councils to closely re-examine the local evidence base and establish their own local development requirements for employment, housing and other land uses through the plan making process. As such, there have been a number of changes to the allocation sites, with some sites removed, additional sites included and modifications to some sites, and therefore an update to the WCS is required to provide supporting evidence for these changes. Note: The South Worcestershire Councils have since published the South Worcestershire Development Plan: Proposed Submission Document in January 2013 and some sites that have been assessed as part of this Water Cycle Study have not been taken forward into the South Worcestershire Development Plan. 1.2 Water Cycle Study objectives The WCS update will form an integral part of the South Worcestershire Councils' evidence base in terms of identifying locations for development in the South Worcestershire Development Plan (SWDP). The primary objective of the WCS update is to be part of the evidence base supporting the SWDP to inform employment and housing allocations. The SWDP supersedes the South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy. This water cycle study and its strategy aim to achieve the following objectives 2 : Urban development not exceeding environmental constraints; Focus development in the most sustainable locations; Secure water cycle infrastructure prior or alongside development, and; Delivery of more sustainable infrastructure options. The purpose of this addendum is to update the original 2010 WCS report, where appropriate, not to replace it entirely. The majority of the 2010 WCS is still applicable today. This addendum provides an update on policy and supporting documents, and assesses the proposed allocation sites in the SWDP in terms of impact on sewers and sewerage and water supply demands. 1 South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy Water Cycle Study: Final Report (JBA Consulting, September 2010) 2 Water Cycle Study Guidance (EA, January 2009) 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 1

22 1.3 Report user guide Table 1-1 outlines the information contained in each chapter and how it can be used. Chapter Table 1-1: SFRA chapters and contents Contents 1. Introduction Provides a background to the study, defines objectives, outlines the approach adopted and the consultation performed 2. Changes to legislation Provides details on the changes to planning and water resource legislation and policy since the 2010 Water Cycle Study. 3. Overview of 2010 Water Cycle Study Gives an overview of the 2010 Water Cycle Study: brief summary of each chapter and highlighting where data in this 2012 Update addendum report supersedes the 2010 study. 4. Overview of future development Summarises the development proposals for the South Worcestershire area 5. Wastewater collection and treatment Provides an assessment of the SDWP proposed allocation sites impact upon the sewers and sewerage infrastructure. 6. Water resources and supply Provides an assessment of the SDWP proposed allocation sites impact upon water supply resources in the South Worcestershire area. 7. Conclusions, recommendations and policy Review the 2012 Update and its implications 1.4 Approach The analysis in the 2010 WCS and this 2012 Update takes a demand based approach and therefore growth comes with some hidden costs, partly met through water bills. Resourcebased planning would be an alternative approach. However, South Worcestershire is a waterscarce region within no water available or over-abstracted categories, which might mean restricting development Review of 2010 South Worcestershire Water Cycle Study The 2010 study has been reviewed to determine what areas of the study are still applicable and what areas needed updating due to changes in legislation, policy and guidance. The review also highlighted that assessment of sewers and sewerage and water supply demands needed to be reassessed due to changes to the SWDP allocation sites, with some sites removed, additional sites included and modifications to some sites Assessment of sewers, sewerage and water supply demands The 2010 WCS was based on a lot of detailed data made available by Severn Trent Water at the time, including their 2008 Worcestershire Growth Point Study. However, limited detailed data was available for the assessment of sewers, sewerage and water supply demands for this 2013 update. Severn Trent Water were able to supply a broad scale assessment for the allocation sites, based on a red, amber, green (RAG) analysis. 1.5 Consultation The following parties (external to the three councils) have been consulted during the preparation of this update to the Water Cycle Study: 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 2

23 1.5.1 Environment Agency The Environment Agency was consulted at an early stage to discuss the requirements of this update. They also provided information about the Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies (CAMS) updates due early next year. The Environment Agency were provided the opportunity to review the WCS 2012 Update at the draft and final stages Worcestershire County Council Worcestershire County Council has gathered a considerable amount of data about flood risk and past flooding within the county as part of their role as Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA), including flooding from sewers. Access to the County Council datasets has been provided for this 2012 update. They were also provided with the opportunity to comment on this 2012 Update addendum report Severn Trent Water Severn Trent Water was consulted to provide information on the impacts of the SWDP proposed allocations on the sewers and sewerage infrastructure in South Worcestershire and provided information about any water supply issues the area. Severn Trent Water were also able to supply assurances that they will complete necessary improvements to provide any additional capacity requirements once there is sufficient confidence the development will go ahead, and will ensure that their assets will have no adverse effect on the environment. The full statement is provided in Appendix C. They were also provided with the opportunity to comment on the draft WCS report. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 3

24 Figure 1-1: Water Cycle Study extent 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 4

25 2 Changes to legislation 2.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published on 27 th March 2012, as part of reforms to make the planning system less complex and more accessible, to protect the environment and to promote sustainable growth. It replaces the Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPGs) and Planning Policy Statements (PPSs); however, some technical guidance remains. The NPPF is guidance for local planning authorities to help them prepare Local Plans. Paragraph 100 of the NPPF states Local Plans should be supported by a strategic flood risk assessment and develop policies to manage flood risk from all sources, taking account of advice from the Environment Agency and other relevant flood risk management bodies, such as Lead Local Flood Authorities and Internal Drainage Boards. Local Plans should apply a sequential, risk-based approach to the location of development to avoid, where possible, flood risk to people and property and manage any residual risk, taking account of the impacts of climate change 3. Technical guidance on flood risk has been published alongside the NPPF and sets out how the policy should be implemented, although it is stated that this is an interim measure. Whilst the NPPF concentrates on high level national policy and avoids prescriptive guidance, Environment Agency guidance published in May 2012 states the Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk Practice Guide is still extant. Paragraph 156 of the NPPF states: Local planning authorities should set out the strategic priorities for the area in the Local Plan. This should include strategic policies to deliver...the provision of infrastructure for transport, telecommunications, waste management, water supply, wastewater, flood risk and coastal changes management, and the provision of minerals and energy. The 2010 Water Cycle Study and this addendum report will support the South Worcestershire councils develop policies for water supply and wastewater. 2.2 Flood and Water Management Act (2010) The Flood Risk Regulations transpose the EC Flood Directive into UK law and place responsibility upon all Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs) to manage local flood risk. The Flood and Water Management Act (FWMA) received Royal Assent in April As part of this Act 4, Local Authorities i.e. county councils or unitary authorities were defined as Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs) so that more responsibility was given to local councils to manage flood risk in their area. Consequently, the approach to managing floods and water resources can be more local-specific and avoids delays that are usually encountered when consulting between different organisations. A Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) for an area, in this case Worcestershire County Council, must develop, maintain, apply and monitor a strategy for local flood risk management in its area (a local flood risk management strategy (LFRMS)). The LLFA can consult with other risk management authorities (including Severn Trent Water) and they require information for their flood and coastal erosion risk management functions. The LFRMS for Worcestershire is still in its early stages. The FWMA calls for the establishment of a SUDS Approving Body (SAB) to be set up in county, county borough or unitary local authorities. This requires SAB approval of drainage systems for new and redeveloped sites to be obtained before construction can commence. Severn Trent Water will be a consultee to the SAB. At the time of writing, the date of commencement for the sections of the FWMA requiring SABs has been postponed several times and remains uncertain. Until the SAB regulations are fully established, developers are advised to contact the District Councils drainage officers and the Environment Agency before a site can be developed. Once the SAB regulations are established developers are advised to contact Worcestershire County Council and the Environment Agency before presuming a site can be developed. This contact 3 National Planning Policy Framework (Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2012) 4 Flood and Water Management Act (April 2010) 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 5

26 should be part of wider pre-application discussions that take other considerations into account with respect to drainage and SUDS, for example ecology, open space and amenity. 2.3 Localism Act The purpose of this Act 5 is to shift power from central government back to the councils, communities and individuals and it was given Royal Assent on 15 November This Act allows councils to establish their own development plans to promote additional allocations of employment, housing and other land uses. In order for councils to achieve sustainable development practices, Provision 110 of the Act was introduced to encourage cooperation during the planning process. This duty to cooperate requires Local Authorities to "engage constructively, actively and on an ongoing basis in any process by means of which development plan documents are prepared so far as relating to a strategic matter". Severn Trent Water and the South Worcestershire councils were consulted during both the 2010 Water Cycle Study and this addendum report. 2.4 South Worcestershire Development Plan The South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options was published in September After considering representations on the Preferred Options and new evidence, such as the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2012), the South Worcestershire Councils consulted on Proposed Significant Changes to the Preferred Options plan 7 in the summer of The significant Changes (to the Preferred Options) proposed a revised housing requirement of about 23,200 dwellings and 280 hectares of employment land between 2006 and Around 40% of these dwellings have either been built since 2006, are under construction or have the benefit of planning permission. The 2010 Water Cycle Study was based on the allocations proposed under the South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy. Whilst much of the information contained within the 2010 Water Cycle Study is still relevant and applicable, changes to the allocation sites (with some sites removed, additional sites included and modifications to some sites), mean the impact of these changes on the sewerage infrastructure and water supply needs to be assessed. This addendum report provides the results of this assessment. 2.5 Water White Paper: Water for Life (2011) The Water for Life document 8 outlines the stresses on water resources due to high abstraction rates and the effects of pollution. This combined with population growth and changing rainfall patterns, due to climate change, such as wetter winters and drier summers will put an added strain on the security of our water supplies. Droughts are set to become more likely whereas more intense rainfall will increase the likelihood of surface water flooding. This increase in surface water flooding could result in further pollution of our water bodies. Household water demand has been increasing since the 1950s whilst industrial water use has been declining due to the general move away from heavy industrial practices. As a result, around 50% of water use is now due to household demand. Average personal water use is forecast to drop although this decrease will be offset by population growth, resulting in a 3% increase of total household water demand. However, overall water demand is predicted to drop as leakage and non-household demand reduce. The government objective is to introduce an improved water abstraction regime that is resilient to climate change impacts, population growth and which will better protect the environment. There are also plans to increase interconnection in the water supply system as well as using large scale transfers through existing river and canal systems. This could potentially be achieved by introducing incentives for water companies. Once these changes are in place, DEFRA would expect 5 The Localism Act: Section 110 (Department for Communities and Local Government, November 2011) 6 South Worcestershire Development Plan (SWDP) Preferred Options, Public Consultation Document (September 2011) 7 South Worcestershire Development Plan (SWDP) Proposed Significant Changes to the 2011 Preferred Options (August 2012) 8 Defra (2011) Water White Paper: Water for Life s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 6

27 water companies to plan to meet their future water needs more efficiently; businesses that rely on water abstraction to better manage the risks of reduced water availability and make the necessary investments to adapt to climate change; all abstractors to be able to make use of a more dynamic market in water and water rights to meet their needs resulting in reduced costs and economic growth; all abstractors to be able to make use of a more flexible system that enables access to and sharing of available water and which values high quality discharges into rivers; water ecosystems to be better understood and protected; and minimum regulation, with communities and abstractors working together to manage water resources and protect the water environment within their catchment. The main aims associated with improving the water quality of our rivers is to work towards a new catchment-based approach to managing diffuse pollution and water quality. The key reforms of the Water for Life document include: Setting out changes that can be made now to deal with the legacy of over-abstraction of rivers Re-affirming the catchment approach to dealing with water quality and wider environmental issues Consultation on the introduction of national standards and a new planning approval system for sustainable drainage Licences that are causing serious damage to our rivers, lakes and groundwater can now be removed or varied without compensation under Section 27 9 of the Water Act 2003 as of 15 th July this year. There are also leakage targets in place in order to increase water availability. Ofwat ultimately aims to reach the Sustainable Economic Level of Leakage (SELL) where it would cost more to reduce leakage further than it would to save water or to develop additional supplies, also taking into account the environmental costs of over-abstraction Draft Water Bill July 2012 This Draft Water Bill 10 delivers the remaining legislative commitments set out in the Water White Paper. The main policy areas covered in this Bill are water resources, expansion of the environmental permitting regulations and market reform. This should increase competition in the water sector and deliver benefits to customers. The Water Bill amends the Water Industry Act 1991 by expanding the current water supply licensing regime and introducing provisions for sewerage services Planning for Water in Worcestershire (Update - December 2011) This technical research paper 11 provides local advice on natural resource planning and management within Worcestershire and is an update of the previous technical paper published in Best practice examples have been updated resulting in a list of 39 guidelines. The newly added best practice guidelines are: Discourage the connection of surface water drains into foul sewers in all new developments. Instead encourage the use of SUDS, green infrastructure and/or grey water measures. In areas prone to surface water flooding encourage the removal of surface water drains feeding into foul, and combined, sewers. Instead encourage the retrofitting of SUDS, green infrastructure and/or grey water measures. Encourage the rehabilitation of river morphology (restoration of meanders and connectivity to floodplain can help to slow and store flood waters), especially in areas upstream of settlements prone to fluvial flooding. Maintain and improve the connection between habitats to enable species migration. This can be achieved using green infrastructure and SUDS. 9 Water Act (2003) 10 Draft Water Bill (July 2012) 11 Planning for Water in Worcestershire (Update: December 2011) s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 7

28 Adopt National Indicator 189: Flood and coastal erosion risk management. This report has not been updated since the introduction of the NPPF so it still refers to outdated legislation such as PPS25 but the general recommendations and outcomes of the report show that the paper is intended to act as a background report to help inform policy and strategy preparation rather than creating policies. Overall, this paper outlines the main water issues facing the County over the next 20 years and how they might best manage their water resources in the future. 2.6 Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies The 2010 WCS provided a summary of the CAMS relevant to the South Worcestershire area, assessing the existing and future water resource situation in the area. The 2010 WCS used the following CAMS. The CAMS relevant to the South Worcestershire area are: CAMS Updates Warwickshire Avon CAMS (2006), includes information on Pershore and Evesham Severn Corridor CAMS (2007), includes information on Worcester Teme CAMS, Worcestershire (2005), includes information on Worcester and Tenbury Wells Middle Severn CAMS (2007), includes information on Droitwich Spa Severn Vale CAMS (2008), includes information on Great Malvern and Upton upon Severn These CAMS have not yet been updated since the original 2010 WCS was published. They are expected to be published in early 2013; therefore the current catchment abstraction regulations and rates, detailed in the original 2010 WCS, are still applicable for this 2012 Update. However, the EA were contacted as part of this 2012 Update and were able to provide some details of the proposed licensing strategies expected in the updated CAMS. Note: At the time of writing of this addendum report, the new Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy reports had not yet been published. The new CAMS have since been published in February 2013 and developers should consult these as sites are brought forward. The catchments that are located within Worcestershire, and the urban areas that are contained within them, are detailed below including the main proposals of the updated CAMS. Severn Corridor CAMS (Worcester) For the rivers within the Severn Corridor catchment the Environment Agency advise all abstraction licence applications should be assessed on their own merit, taking into account the requirement to protect downstream flows through a local Hands off Flow (HOF) equivalent to the Q90 flow. For example, abstraction must cease once flows at Deerhurst gauging station (if the abstraction lies downstream of Bewdley) fall below a pre-set threshold. All new or varied licences would be time limited until 31 March 2022, with the normal presumption of renewal being afforded. Other CAMS catchments As the Worcestershire Middle Severn, Teme and Severn Vale CAMS areas all input to the Severn Corridor, it is essential to ensure that the same level of protection (i.e. the protection of Q90 flows) is afforded throughout the whole catchment. The proposed HOFs for the watercourses within all of these CAMS areas have therefore been derived using the following principles: Where the EA s modelling has proposed a HOF which is less restrictive than the Q90 flow, then this has been overridden by an equivalent Q90 HOF for that particular catchment 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 8

29 Where the EA s modelling has proposed a HOF which is more restrictive than the Q90 flow then it has been accepted. This ensures that both the local flows and downstream flows are appropriately protected Where the existing policy currently restricts licences at higher flows than either the Q90 flow or the flow being recommended by modelling, then it is proposed to continue with the current policy in order to prevent unlawful derogation of any existing licence holders Based on the above principles the proposed HOFs for the Worcestershire Middle Severn, Teme and Severn Vale catchments are detailed in the tables shown below: Worcestershire Middle Severn catchment (Droitwich Spa) Table 2-1: Worcestershire Middle Severn catchment abstraction restrictions CAMS Area Site River Existing HOF (Ml/d) Worcestershire Middle Severn Proposed New HOF (Ml/d) Comments Burcote Worfe HOF proposed by model. Oak Cottage Callows Lane Harford Hill Dowles Brook HOF = Q90 equivalent. Stour HOF proposed by model. Salwarpe HOF proposed by model. Licences within the Worcestershire Middle Severn catchment would be time limited until 31 March 2026, with the normal presumption of renewal being afforded. Severn Vale catchment (Great Malvern and Upton upon Severn) CAMS Area Severn Vale Table 2-2: Severn Vale catchment abstraction restrictions Site River Existing HOF (Ml/d) Deerhurst Carey's Brook, Bushley Brook 55 at Wedderburn Bridge GS. Proposed New HOF (Ml/d) 1800 Comments Both the Carey s Brook and the Bushley Brook flow directly to the River Severn, but were tied to the Wedderburn Bridge on the Leadon within the first cycle of CAMS as no HOF was set for the Severn. Now that there is a proposed HOF for Deerhurst it is more appropriate to use this as the control point for any new licences on these watercourses. Licences within the Severn Vale catchment would be time limited until 31 March 2027, with the normal presumption of renewal being afforded. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 9

30 Teme catchment (Worcester and Tenbury Wells) CAMS Area Table 2-3: Teme catchment abstraction restrictions Site River Existing HOF (Ml/d) Teme Tenbury Teme 240 Proposed New HOF (Ml/d) 240 Ml/d for new licences upstream of Tenbury Gauging Station. 226 Ml/d for licences downstream of Tenbury Gauging Station. Comments Existing licences upstream of Tenbury are currently tied to 240 Ml/d due to the sensitivity of the catchment. This HOF will be retained. Downstream of Tenbury the HOF is the Q90 equivalent. Licences within the Teme catchment would be time limited until 31 March 2025, with the normal presumption of renewal being afforded. Warwickshire Avon catchment (Pershore and Evesham) All the tributaries of the River Severn need to have a HOF equivalent to or higher than 1800Ml/d (Q91 flow) at Deerhurst gauging station on the River Severn set under the Habitats Directive review of consents. Table 2-4 highlights the assessment points, within the Warwickshire Avon catchment, that could potentially be impacted by the proposed site allocations. The HOF at AP1 has been increased therefore less water can be abstracted at this site. Table 2-4: Proposed Hands-Off Flow Strategies Assessment Point (AP) Current HOF strategy Proposed HOF strategy 80Ml/d at Stareton and 1800Ml/d at 107Ml/d at AP3 AP1 - River Avon at Rugby Deerhurst (More restrictive HOF) 409Ml/d at Evesham and 1800Ml/d 409Ml/d AP10 - River Avon at Evesham at Deerhurst (Same policy) 38Ml/d at Hinton and 1800Ml/d at 12Ml/d AP11 - River Isbourne at Hinton Deerhurst (Less restrictive HOF) AP13 - Bow Brook at Besford Closed Closed Bridge (Same policy) *Please refer to Appendix A for a more detailed description of the proposed HOF strategies in the Warwickshire Avon catchment. IMPORTANT: Please note that these were the proposed policy as at 2 November The CAMS have since been published in February 2013 and developers should consult the 2013 CAMS as development sites are brought forward. 2.7 Final Severn Water Resources Management Plan (2010) At the time of the 2010 WCS, Severn Trent Water s Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) was still in a Draft stage. Since the 2010 study the WRMP has been finalised and published. The majority of the WRMP has not changes since the draft version, although there have been some changes to Target Headroom requirements. Target Headroom represents the minimum buffer that companies should plan to maintain between water availability for use and demand in order to cater for uncertainties in the estimation of supply and demand values. There has been some change in the Target Headroom between the Draft WRMP and Final WRMP. Table 2-5 sets out those changes. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 10

31 Table 2-5: Severn (WRZ3) Target headroom requirements (Ml/d) Baseline Targets (draft WRMP 2009) Final Strategy Target (Final WRMP 2010) The latest analysis contained within the final WRMP (2010) shows that the Severn Zone will continue to face a long term supply/demand risk which worsens over the forecast period. This is due mainly to climate change driven uncertainty, long term uncertainties in water quality trends and the projected growth in water demand across this zone. The baseline supply-demand balance position goes into deficit in and remains negative thereafter. At the end of AMP6 (2019/20) the supply shortfall is around 100 Ml/d and by the end of the planning period (2034/35), the supply shortfall is around 145 Ml/d. The proposed supply/demand balance strategy for the Severn Water Resource Zone (WRZ3) remains unchanged from the draft Severn Trent Water WRMP (2009) and is included in the appendices. A draft scoping report for the Severn Trent Water WRMP 2014 was published in July 2012 which shows that Severn Trent Water are currently developing their plan to cover the period It is expected that this will be finalised in Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) SUDS provide a way of managing flow rates and flood volumes in order to reduce the impact on water quality and flood risk. The national standards for SUDS published by DEFRA 12 set out guidelines on how to design and construct sustainable drainage networks in order to obtain approval from the SUDS Approving Body (SAB). At the time of writing, SABs are still being reviewed and may be implemented in mid-2013 when Schedule 3 of the Flood Management Act (2010) is enacted. 12 Defra (December 2011) National Standards for sustainable drainage systems: Designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining drainage for surface runoff 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 11

32 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 12

33 3 Overview of 2010 Water Cycle Study 3.1 Summary This chapter summarises the 2010 Water Cycle Study (WCS) 13, outlining the main findings of the report and details which parts of the previous WCS are still relevant, given the changes in policy and the increase in proposed site allocations. Some information contained within this 2012 Update supersedes the information given in the previous WCS. Where this is the case, this has been highlighted and links provided to the relevant section of this 2012 Update report. This report is an addendum to the WCS published in 2010 and consequently both documents should be consulted. 3.2 Chapter 2 Data collection and methodology This chapter outlined the data provided by stakeholders as well as how it was used and the limitations of the data. The different types of data included housing growth, wastewater, water resources and supply, water quality and flood risk management. The main limitations were that the assessment of water quality is generally broad scale and further site investigation may be required to determine a more accurate assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed sites. There were also limitations in the estimation of dwelling densities and population. Additionally several key reports, such as the Severn Trent Water WRM Plan, were in the draft stages at the time of the WCS publication so any new information contained in the final versions of these reports were not accessible. WCS UPDATE: Much of the data provided by Severn Trent Water for the original 2010 WCS is still relevant. For this addendum report, STW provided information on water resource and supply, and an assessment of the proposed site allocations on the sewerage infrastructure. 3.3 Chapter 3 Development scenarios and key developments The Preferred Option (Dec 2007) housing targets in the West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) Phase 2 Revision (draft) indicated that 24,500 new dwellings should be built during The majority of the proposed sites were allocated for residential properties, although some land was allocated as employment land. This chapter outlined the main urban areas considered for development and highlights the variety in the type of employment in the area including schools and unspecified employment land. Although, employment land is quite unspecific as it can range from heavy industry to office buildings and the type of employment can have an effect on the impact that the development could have on the sewerage infrastructure. Consequently, Severn Trent Water was unable to assess the impact of employment land on the water and wastewater infrastructure as the exact employment type was unknown. In order to assess potential impacts of employment land, STW provided some indicative values of water supply and wastewater for several employment types. 13 South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy Water Cycle Study: Final Report (JBA Consulting, September 2010) 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 13

34 WCS UPDATE: Since the previous SFRA, there have been a number of changes to the planning system including the Localism Act (2011) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2012). The Localism Act and the proposed revocation of the Regional Spatial Strategies provided the opportunity for the three Councils to closely re-examine the local evidence base and establish their own local development requirements for employment, housing and other land uses through the plan making process. As such, there have been a number of changes to the allocation sites, with some sites removed, additional sites included and modifications to some sites. Additionally some sites have already received planning permission. The WCS update will form an integral part of the Councils' evidence base in terms of identifying locations for development. The South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options was published in September 2011, superseding the previous Joint Core Strategy. After considering representations on the Preferred Options and new evidence, such as the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2012), the South Worcestershire Councils consulted on Proposed Significant Changes to the Preferred Options plan in the summer of Section 4 describes the new allocations proposed for South Worcestershire. As a result Chapter 3 of the original 2010 WCS has been superseded by Chapter 4 of this WCS Addendum report. 3.4 Chapter 4 Wastewater collection and treatment The initial assessment was based on information provided by Severn Trent Water in their December 2008 STW Growth Point Study, including assessment of the original (2010) proposed site allocations of peak Dry Weather Flow (DWF) and storm flow, hydraulic capacity of sewage treatment works and notational solutions and costs. As this is based on the site allocations proposed in 2009/2010, the sites are now out of date; however, the information contained in this Chapter can still give an idea of how an increase in properties results in an increased Dry Weather Flow (DWF). The main findings in this chapter are the following treatments works had hydraulic capacity restraints, although there were no physical constraints to upgrades. No specific engineering solutions or costs were identified. Worcester Bromwich Road Sewage Treatment Works Powick Sewage Treatment Works Ladywood (Droitwich Spa) Sewage Treatment Works The 2010 WCS also concluded that the majority of the 2009/2010 site allocations the sewerage infrastructure required investment and notional solutions were proposed by STW. WCS UPDATE: The December 2008 STW Growth Point Study assessed the South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy proposed allocations, which are now superseded by the allocations proposed in the South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options and Proposed Changes to the Preferred Options documents. Whilst some of the assessment in Chapter 4 of the original 2010 WCS is still applicable, Chapter 5 of this Addendum Report supersedes all information relating to proposed allocations. 3.5 Chapter 5 Water resources and supply CAMS and information provided by STW were used to assess water resource and supply capability in South Worcestershire. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 14

35 The main conclusion from this chapter was that water as a resource is scarce in the Severn River Basin. It was concluded that all the 2009/2010 proposed sites were located next to areas that had been designated as having a status of either No Water Available or Over Abstracted in terms of surface water. The chapter also concluded that investment would be required to the water supply infrastructure to accommodate the proposed site allocations. WCS UPDATE: The December 2008 STW Growth Point Study assessed the South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy proposed allocations, which are now superseded by the allocations proposed in the South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options and Proposed Changes to the Preferred Options documents. Whilst some of the assessment in Chapter 4 of the original 2010 WCS is still applicable, Chapter 5 of this Addendum Report supersedes all information relating to proposed allocations. 3.6 Chapter 6 Water quality and environmental issues This chapter contained an assessment of the ecological and chemical water quality status in the South Worcestershire area, existing pressures and potential impact of the proposed site allocations. It also investigated management options and policies. The chapter refers to the Regional Spatial Strategy for the West Midlands which is to be abolished under the 2011 Localism Act. The ecological and chemical water quality status was assessed using the Environment Agency s Final Severn River Basin Management Plan (RBMP). The RBMP has not been updated since the 2010 WCS so this assessment is still applicable. Most of the rivers assessed were classified as Moderate ecological quality. However, approximately 30% of the rivers investigated were classified as having failed the chemical quality assessment with Tenbury Wells and Evesham containing rivers of generally lower chemical quality. In terms of groundwater quality, most areas had a good quantitative and chemical status although the groundwater in the Worcestershire Middle Severn region was defined as having a poor quantitative and chemical status. The 2009/2010 site allocations were mostly located outside of any designated Groundwater Source Protection Zones (SPZs) although several of the allocations were above minor aquifers that may be potentially sensitive and therefore need to be protected from pollution. The chapter also details the existing pressures in the area, again based upon the River Severn RBMP. These pressures included: Over abstraction Point source pollution Diffuse pollution Sediments Physical modification Endocrine disrupters Organic pollution Climate change The majority of the 2009/2010 site allocations were contained within Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZs). A number of management options and policies were outlined for the 2009/2010 site allocations to minimise their impact on the neighbouring watercourses by reducing both diffuse and point sources of pollution. These included: SUDS Green infrastructure 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 15

36 Environmental assessment Abstraction licences River basin management WCS UPDATE: Chapter 6 of the original 2010 WCS is still relevant and should continue to be used. A broad scale assessment of the sewage treatement works, WFD status of receiving watercourses and increase in development to those works has been undertaken for this update to identify those developments that will require further investigation to ensure there is no detrimental impact on the quality of the receiving watercourse due to increased loading on the treatment works. 3.7 Chapter 7 Flood Risk Management The original 2009 South Worcestershire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) is the main source of information in this chapter and indicates that the main sources of flooding to the proposed strategic site allocations are considered to be fluvial and surface water. There is a history of flooding in the area with the most significant recent events occurring in 1998, 2000 and 2007 where several hundred properties were flooded on each occasion. There have been no records of groundwater flooding in the site allocation areas. The main sources of flooding were identified as being from the River Severn, the River Teme, Laughern Brook, Hatfield Brook, Whitacres Brook, Pool Brook, the River Salwarpe, the River Avon, Merry Brook, the River Isbourne, as well as several other ordinary watercourses that could have an impact on the study area. Other flooding sources included surcharging sewers and overland flow. Flow rates should be limited to existing Greenfield rates and should not be directed to any existing sewers. Flow should be directed to the nearest watercourse, where possible, via appropriate attenuation except Hatfield Brook as issues of flooding have been identified further downstream. The sites that are most at risk of fluvial and surface water flooding i.e. contained within Flood Zone 3 and/or 2 as well as being located close to a watercourse, include most of Worcester and Malvern East. The South Worcestershire SFRA should be consulted for more detailed information regarding flood risk and policy. WCS UPDATE: Since the original 2010 WCS was published there has been an update to the South Worcestershire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. This Level 2 SFRA update has assessed flood risk to all of the sites proposed in the South Worcestershire Development Plan. Chapter 7 of the original 2010 WCS is now out of date and the South Worcestershire Level 2 SFRA Update should be used when looking at flood risk in South Worcestershire. 3.8 Chapter 8 Demand Management This chapter set out the policy drivers for demand management as well as detailing measures managing demand for water. Water efficiency measures included Metering Efficiency strategies being promoted by STW Leakage reductions STW had no policy on compulsory metering as they found that it was not cost effective in the Severn Water Resource Zone, although they have developed other means of increasing water efficiency. These options for increasing water efficiency included: 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 16

37 Provision of Cistern Displacement Devices (CDD) Self audit Severn Trent Water sites construction or refurbishment of offices with water efficient fixtures Institutional, commercial and residential audit and retrofit Product subsidies Partner activity partnering product manufacturers with suppliers Reduce leaks Severn Trent Water s Water Efficiency programme was projected to save around 16.35Ml/day and they envisage that they will reduce leakage to 435Ml/day by The chapter also outlined the Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSHs). Guidelines from the Homes and Communities Agency recommended that developers should build new homes to at least Level 3 standard under the Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH), a standard of 105l/p/d. Chapter 8 of the 2010 WCS also set out a Water Resource Policy for the South Worcestershire area. Given that demand management is still necessary and important for the area, and the information this chapter is based has not since been updated, the assessment is still considered applicable in this 2012 WCS Update. WCS UPDATE: Chapter 8 of the original 2010 WCS is still relevant and should continue to be used unless any further updates in demand forecasts are published. 3.9 Chapter 9 Conclusions The 2010 WCS concluded the current sewerage system is unable to cope with the proposed strategic site allocations but investment and improvements in infrastructure will allow them to be accommodated. The infrastructure upgrades would usually require 12 months to install from the time of agreement on funding from the developer. Planning should account for a maximum 3-4 year period required for improvements in capacity and treatment techniques. Development in South Worcestershire is restricted as water resources are scarce and there are limited abstraction licences available. Therefore demand management is vital in this region in order to balance supply with water demand. The watercourses flowing through or near the 2009/2010 proposed allocation sites were failing to reach the WFD standards in terms of both chemical or ecological quality and development could increase the pressure on the environment and water quality. The main flood risk was from fluvial or surface water flooding and groundwater was not considered to pose a significant risk in the area. WCS UPDATE: The majority of the conclusions of the original 2010 WCS still stand as most of the data is still relevant. Only the number of proposed site allocations has increased and assessment undertaken by STW (Sections 5 and 6 of this 2012 Update) on the impact of these allocations on sewerage and water supply has shown no significant change to the sewerage and water supply situation in Severn Trent Water has an obligation to provide additional treatment capacity, as and when required, according to the Water Industry Act Therefore the main difference is that more investment in infrastructure is potentially required for the higher number of proposed site allocations and the phasing of development needs to be considered carefully due to the time potentially required to implement any upgrades to the infrastructure. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 17

38 3.9.1 Recommendations There are a range of technology options available to developers to achieve the required water efficiency targets: Water efficient shower heads Dual flush toilets Reduced flow rate taps Water efficient appliances e.g. dishwasher and washing machines This is by no means an exhaustive list although this is in addition to the compulsory rainwater harvesting or greywater recycling required for new developments. Additional modelling of the sewer systems was recommended to obtain more accurate results as soon as the proposed strategic site allocations and dwelling numbers are finalised in greater detail. WCS UPDATE: The recommendations are still relevant as they are feasible options of increasing water efficiency, and the compulsory rainwater harvesting or greywater recycling guideline still stands. The recommendations of the original 2010 WCS are still relevant and should continue to be used. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 18

39 4 Overview of future development The South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options was published in September After considering representations on the Preferred Options and new evidence, such as the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2012), the South Worcestershire Councils consulted on Proposed Significant Changes to the Preferred Options plan in the summer of The significant Changes (to the Preferred Options) proposed a revised housing requirement of about 23,200 dwellings and 280 hectares of employment land between 2006 and Around 40% of these dwellings have either been built since 2006, are under construction or have the benefit of planning permission or a previous Local Plan allocation for development 14. Note: the allocations detailed in this document are based on the sites put forward in the August 2012 Proposed Significant Changes to the 2011 Preferred Options. Some of these sites may not have been taken through to the SWDP Proposed Submission Document (December 2012). 4.1 Extent and type of development The SWDP to accommodate the future development can be divided into three areas, shown in Table 4-1. The following sections provide greater detail on future development for the main urban areas in South Worcestershire. Table 4-1: Dwelling and employment land requirements between 2006 and 2030 Requirements for dwellings Requirement for employment land (hectares) Wider Worcester Area* 9, Wychavon 8, Malvern Hills 4, Total for South Worcestershire 23, * includes urban extensions serving the needs of Worcester City located on land immediately adjoining the city boundary 4.2 Review of future development Future development is summarised below Worcester The SWDP proposes a total housing provision of 9,400 dwellings and 120 hectares of employment land in the Wider Worcestershire Area. Of these, 1,770 dwellings and 9.0 hectares of employment land have been completed since Just fewer than 1,200 dwellings have planning permission. Of the remaining proposed dwellings, approximately 1,400 are proposed in allocations sites within the city boundary, and about 3,900 in urban extensions including: Worcester South urban extension (Broomhall Community and Norton Barracks Community) Worcester West urban extension (Temple Laugherne) Worcester East urban extension (Kilbury Drive) Worcester North urban extension (Gwillam s Farm) 14 South Worcestershire Development Plan: Public Consultation Document (Malvern Hills District Council, Worcester City Council and Wychavon District Council, September 2011) 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 19

40 Figure 4-1: Worcester Allocations 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 20

41 4.2.2 Droitwich Spa Figure 4-2: Droitwich Allocations A proposed 340 dwelling have been allocated within the development boundary of Droitwich Spa, predominantly delivered on Brownfield land within the development boundary. An additional 10ha of employment land has been proposed to the Stonebridge Cross Business Park Evesham Approximately 476 dwellings are proposed within the development boundary at Evesham, predominantly on greenfield land. Existing open space will be protected, enhanced and, where, appropriate, new accessible green spaces identified. Evesham has insufficient development capacity within the development boundary therefore the SWDP proposes two urban extensions with a phased delivery of approximately 400 dwellings each. These urban extensions are located at the following sites West of Cheltenham Road South of Pershore Road A further extension of Vale Park, to the south of the A46(T) is also proposed with a phased delivery of approximately 20 hectares of employment land. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 21

42 Figure 4-3: Evesham Allocations Malvern Figure 4-4: Malvern Allocations Malvern s urban capacity has been established at approximately 4.5 hectares of employment land and 170 dwellings on smaller sites, with a proposed additional 250 dwellings and 4.5 hectares of employment land on the Malvern Hills Technology Park (QinetiQ) site. To meet the level of development set out in the Development Strategy, it is proposed that a further s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 22

43 hectares of employment land and 700 dwellings will have to be developed outside of the town boundary at Newland, north east Malvern. This site includes approximately 50 hectares of land, allocated for a mixed use urban extension including residential dwellings, employment, community infrastructure, public open space facilities. The SWDP requires a comprehensive masterplan for the Newland site Pershore 673 dwellings have been allocated in Pershore. Of these, 87 dwellings have been proposed within Pershore and 600 on an urban extension north of Pershore at Station Road and Wyre Road. Proposed urban extensions in Pershore also allow for the allocation of five hectares of employment land to the north of Wyre Road. Figure 4-5: Pershore Allocations 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 23

44 4.2.6 Tenbury Wells Figure 4-6: Tenbury Wells Allocations Development at Tenbury Wells is limited due to floodplain, landscape and access issues. The former cattle market site at Teme Street has been allocated to provide 0.88 hectares of employment land with redevelopment or alternative use focussing on retail, commercial, recreation, leisure and community uses. Proposed additional sites in Tenbury Wells have been allocated for approximately 70 dwellings. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 24

45 4.2.7 Upton upon Severn Figure 4-7: Upton upon Severn Allocations Floodplain, landscape and access issues limit the potential for development at Upton upon Severn. Housing and commercial development for this area has been focussed on the settlements of Holly Green, with 25 dwellings allocated to Holly Green. Although there are flooding constraints, the SWDP has defined Upton on Severn as one of the most sustainable settlements in the Malvern Hills District with a large population and associated community, education and community services. The town also supports a large marina and tourist trade Rural Areas South Worcestershire is predominantly rural and a key objective of the SWDP is to retain this characteristic. The development strategy for rural areas aims to direct development to rural settlements which contain a variety of services and community facilities, with reasonable existing public transport links. These factors were assessed using the Village Facilities and Rural Transport Survey to determine the sustainability of settlements. Settlements were classified into Category 1, Category 2 and Category 3 settlements, with Category 1 being considered the most sustainable. The SWDP has allocated approximately 1,800 dwellings in rural areas by Of these approximately 1,000 have been allocated to Category 1 settlements, 700 to Category 2 and 180 to Category 3 settlements. 4.3 Windfall sites Windfall is unallocated development. Changes introduced by the NPPF enables the South Worcestershire Councils to include an allowance for small, non-garden land, housing windfalls. The windfall allowance for Malvern Hills, Worcester and Wychavon are 45, 69 and 82 for 2016 to 2026 and then 46, 30 and 55 for 2026 to 2030 respectively. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 25

46 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 26

47 5 Wastewater collection and treatment 5.1 Introduction An integral part of the planning process is the treatment and collection of wastewater and this is largely dependent on the extent of proposed development. Severn Trent Water is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the sewerage infrastructure required for private properties that are directly connected in the region. However, this does not include systems that do not connect directly to the wastewater network, such as highway drainage or SUDS, unless the sites are specifically adopted by STW. The capabilities of existing sewerage strategic assets to cope with the increases in future demand for each area was assessed as part of this 2012 Update. Severn Trent Water has been consulted throughout this WCS update. They have undertaken some broad scale assessment of the impact of the proposed development sites on the sewerage infrastructure using a traffic light (RAG) approach, and this assessment has been provided for use in the WCS update. A summary of STW s assessment is provided in the following tables and further, detailed, site information can be found in the appendices. Important Note: The information and results contained within this chapter supersede the previous Water Cycle Study as more sites have been proposed and several policies have been updated or implemented. 5.2 Site Assessments Introduction The impacts of the previously proposed site allocations on peak DWF and peak storm flows may not be applicable to the current Water Cycle Study (WCS) due to changes made to the location, number and boundaries of site allocations proposed for South Worcestershire. In this chapter, an assessment of the proposed sites on the sewerage infrastructure and sewage treatments works is provided. The impact of individual sites on the sewerage infrastructure is provided in Appendix B Sewerage Infrastructure Table 5-1 summarises the potential impacts of the proposed sites on sewerage infrastructure in each of the three South Worcestershire council areas. The majority of the sites have a low impact on the sewerage infrastructure, with several sites causing a medium impact on infrastructure. Overall, the largest impact on the sewerage infrastructure is proposed allocations within Worcester City. For further detailed information on site location and the affected subcatchments, please refer to Appendix B. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 27

48 Total Units Table 5-1: Summary of the impacts of the new site allocations Size (ha of employment land) Potential impact on sewerage infrastructure Malvern Hills Low - 42 proposed sites And 2 sites not served by public sewers (n/a) 1, Medium 4 proposed sites 0 0 High 0 proposed sites Worcester City Council Low - 30 proposed sites 1,250 4 Medium 9 proposed sites 3, High 5 proposed sites Wychavon 1, Low 72 proposed sites And 1 site not served by public sewers (n/a) 2, Medium 12 proposed sites 0 0 High 0 proposed sites *Please see Table A2 in the Appendices for more detailed site information including the catchments affected by the site allocations as well as comments from STW. Phasing The broad scale assessment of the impact of the proposed development sites on the sewerage infrastructure provided by STW has indicated that a number of infrastructure improvements are required for some of the allocations before they can be brought forward. These improvements will have an impact on when allocations come forward for development and whether there are any restrictions in the phasing of development. Sewerage infrastructure capacity improvements are usually initiated once a developer agrees to fund the required improvements and STW have indicated these would normally take up to 12 months to complete. The solutions and costs of infrastructure improvements will need to be assessed once more details on the individual development sites become available. As part of this WCS update, the proposed developments have been classified according to whether there will be potential restrictions on the phasing of development due to required improvements to the sewerage infrastructure. Class 1: These are proposed development sites for which STW have assessed the impact on the sewerage infrastructure as low and improvements to the sewerage infrastructure is unlikely or minimal. It is recommended that phasing of sites classed as Class 1 should take precedence over sites classed as Class 2 or Class s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 28

49 Class 2: These are proposed development sites where STW have assessed the impact on the sewerage infrastructure to be medium and more investigation is required to determine the most appropriate connection, or proposed sites where, depending on the results of further investigations, infrastructure improvements may be required. As such it is recommended that phasing of sites categorised as Stage 1 take precedence over sites classed as Stage 2 or until further investigation has shown sites in Stage 2 can be brought forward without the need for sewerage infrastructure improvements. Sites classed as Stage 2, where further investigation has shown sewerage infrastructure improvements are required, will have constraints on phasing until the required improvements have been investigated and agreed. Class 3: These are sites which STW have assessed the impact on the sewerage infrastructure to be high and are restricted on when they can be brought forward without further investigation into, and agreement on, sewerage infrastructure improvements. Whilst sites in Class 3 may have a high impact upon the sewerage infrastructure and require additional investigation into improvements, STW has indicated there are no constraints that may limit the opportunity for improvements and solutions are available. Phasing of sites classed as Stage 1 or 2 should take precedence over those in Stage 3, or until improvements to the sewerage infrastructure can be investigated and agreed. Table 5-2 sets out the recommended phasing classes for the proposed South Worcestershire developments. NOTE: The phasing suggested is based upon the availability and suitability of the sewerage infrastructure and does not take account of the ability of the wastewater treatment works to accommodate the increased headroom without a detrimental impact upon the receiving watercourses. Section provides a broad scale assessment of sewage treatment works, the proposed site allocations within the works catchment and the ecological status of the receiving water body. This is in lieu of assessment of additional capacity and headroom requirements. This gap in the data including the ecological status and infrastructure requirements needs to be investigated before sites are brought forward and could affect phasing of developments. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 29

50 Table 5-2: Recommended phasing classes for proposed development sites CLASS 1 CLASS 2 CLASS 3 Worcester City SWDP7/2 Fire Station/Crown Gate/Angel Place/The Butts SWDP6/10 Land at Albert Road SWDP6/11 Swimming Pool Site, Sansome Walk SWDP6/12 Claines Recreation Ground and adjacent Land SWDP6/NEWJ Land North Warndon Woods SWDP6/14 Worcester Woods SWDP6/NEWI Land South Warndon Woods SWDP8/5 Worcester Technology Park SWDP6/16 Church Farm, Claines (cemetery) SWDP6/16 Church Farm, Claines (P&R) SWDP8/4 Gwillam's Farm SWDP6/18 Midland Road SWDP6/19 Perdiswell (Leisure uses) SWDP6/2 Gregory's Bank SWDP6/20 School of Art and Design, Barbourne (Care Home) SWDP6/NEWD Old Brewery Service Station, Barbourne Road SWDP6/22Warehouse, Portland Street SWDP6/21 Former Hallow Road Tip SWDP6/4 Cedar Avenue / Blackpole Road SWDP6/5 Gas Holder SIte SWDP6/6 Old Northwick Farm SWDP6/7 Wyvern Service Station SWDP6/8 Moor Street Clinic SWDP6/NEWA West of Grasmere Drive/South of Ullswater Close SWDP6/NEWC East of Stanley Road/North of Primary School SWDP6/23 Offerton Lane Gypsy and Travellers Site SWDP6/NEWF North and south of Brookthorpe Close SWDP7/5 Carden Street SWDP7/3 Former Co-op building/cornmarket SWDP7/6 Sidbury SWDP8/3 Land to the rear of Kilbury Drive SWDP6/15 Government Offices SWDP6/NEWH Land at Nunnery Way WO93 Henwick Road/Chequers Lane SWDP7/4 Shrub Hill SWDP6/3 Masonic Hall Site SWDP6/9 Post Office Sorting Office, Westbury Street SWDP6/13 Former Ronkswood Hospital Site SWDP6/1 Land South of Lyppard Hill SWDP8/1 Broomhall Community and Norton Barrack SWDP8/2 Temple Laughern - Worcester West SWDP6/NEWB A44 Service Station/Bromyard Road SWDP6/17 Grove Farm, Bromyard Road SWDP6/NEWE West of Dudley Close 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 30

51 Malvern Hills CLASS 1 CLASS 2 CLASS 3 SWDP23/1 The Orchard SWDP23/2 Land to west of Apostle Oak Cottage SWDP25/1 South of Swan Orchard SWDP24/2 Land adj. school SWDP24/3 Wheatfield Court SWDP13/1 Walsh's Yard, Poolbrook Common Road SWDP13/5 Former Recreation Field- Poolbrook Close SWDP13/6 Homestead, Halfkey SWDP13/7 Portland House SWDP13/8 Land to rear of 12 priory Road SWDP13/9 Land off Mayfield road SWDP23/5 Land Bet. School & Westmere, Hanley Swan SWDP23/6 Land at Yew Tree Farm, Hanley Swan SWDP21/1 Sunny Meadow SWDP23/4 Land adj coalyard & adj to school SWDP23/11 Peachley Court Farm SWDP23/12 Stand cottages SWDP13/10 Lower Howsell Road SWDP13/11 Hospital Site Lansdowne Crescent SWDP23/15 Land at Claphill Lane SWDP23/16 Land at Old Bransford Road SWDP23/17 Land adj Upperwick Lane SWDP13/3 Land off Welland Road, Upper Welland MHTH10 Land Off Greenfields Lane, Tunnel Hill, MHWD10 Land at The Pheasant Inn (part) SWDP23/3 Land to south of Hope Lane SWDP24/5 Off Bowling Green Road SWDP13/2 BMX Track off Mayfield Road MHHA14 Land to north of Orchard Close SWDP23/9 West of Lawns MHKY33 Land at Bight Farm SWDP23/7 The Lawns SWDP13/13 Barracks Site Geraldine Road SWDP15 Blackmore Park SWDP16 Three Counties Showground SWDP13/4 Former playing fields, Green Lane, Malvern Wells SWDP23/14 Land adj to the Crown (West) SWDP23/13 Land adj to Crown (South) MHPW06 Land adjacent Crown Inn SWDP24/6 Former allotments, Winsmore MHTW14 Land adj the Haven, Oldwood Road SWDP20/1 Land opposite Morningside, Oakwood Rd SWDP23/10 Land South of Bell Lane SWDP13/12 QinetiQ S7T Site St Andrews Rd SWDP14 QinetiQ SWDP17 Newlands 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 31

52 Wychavon CLASS 1 CLASS 2 CLASS 3 37-N17 Land to the North of Boat Lane 37-N21 Land East of Offenham Road Adj 37-N03 Land behind Lichfield Avenue SWDP12/3 Vale Park (Phase 3) SWDP25/6 Adjacent to Defford First School, off Church Lane SWDP24/21 Land R/O Green End SWDP24/25 Land adjacent to Bridge Inn, Foredraught Lane SWDP24/7 Land along Station Road opposite properties from Evenlode to Lindencroft Land west of Main Street Land off Blacksmiths Lane Land east of Upper Street SWDP9/4 Oakham Place Land to the rear of Ashfurlong, Main Street Land adjacent to "The Lanterns" SWDP24/10 Land at Field Barn Lane SWDP24/17 Land off Broadway Lane, adjacent to Grey Lyn. SWDP25/11 Land adjacent to Blakes Hill Land off Winchcombe Road SWDP25/9 Land at Park Farm, Jobs Lane Land opposite the Village Hall & tennis courts Land at Conderton Close & Woodbine Cottage SWDP24/11 Site behind Hawthorne Close, off Stonebow Road SWDP9/3 Boxing Club SWDP25/10 Land South of Blacksmith Lane Land adjacent to Honeybourne Road SWDP18/3 Garage Court, St Andrews Rd SWDP18/7 Land adj. Conningsby Drive Elmley Road SWDP23/22 Land to the east of Kingsdale Road Land to the rear of Cleeve Prior First School SWDP24/18 Land to east of Boot Inn on Radford Road Land behind Main Street, behind SWDP18/4 Garage Court, Abbots Road SWDP23/33 Land South of The Racks SWDP24/22 Land adjoining North Terrace & Uplands SWDP23/20 Land to the South of Bibsworth House, Leamington Road SWDP24/19 Land adjacent to Crest Hill, SWDP24/26 Land rear of Hawthorn Rise SWDP*A Throckmorton Airfield 2012SC Stonebridge Cross SWDP24/13 Land east of Stonebow Road adjacent to railway line Site to south of Drakes Broughton along B /10/2014 Land at Averill Close SWDP23/29 Land East of Withybed Lane SWDP24/16 Dilmore Lane / Station Road SWDP12/1 Cheltenham Road (Phase2) SWDP VPx Vale Park extension SWDP11/1 Land at bottom of Peewit Road, Hampton. SWDP12/2 South of Pershore Road, Hampton. SWDP19/1 Station Road/Wyre Road, Pershore (a) 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 32

53 CLASS 1 CLASS 2 CLASS Derelect Garage Site on Worcester Road SWDP24/27 Land between College Road and School Lane SWDP23/32 Land off Leasowes Road LP1 Ivy Lane SWDP24/9 Littlebrook Nurseries SWDP9/5 Acre Lane SWDP24/14 Land to north of Russell Drive off Pershore Road SWDP18/1 Garage, High Street SWDP18/2 Health Centre, Lower Priest Lane SWDP24/23 Land north of Green End and Owls Reach SWDP24/24 Land off Station Road & Long Hyde Road SWDP18/6 Land rear of the High Street SWDP23/19 Land rear of Oak Lane SWDP9/6 Willow Court, Westwood Road SWDP25/4 Land opposite Village Hall off Church Road SWDP23/27 Land behind the High Street SWDP23/34 Land north of Woodhall Lane SWDP23/18 Land off Banks Road SWDP23/30 Land off Main Street SWDP23/31 Land south of Gibbs Lane Land off Three Cocks Lane SWDP11/3 Land off Cheltenham Road SWDP24/8 Land north of Station Rd SWDP23/23 Land west of Leamington Road SWDP23/24 Land adjacent to Station Road 29wy-02 Land off Crown Lane SWDP23/35 Land off Worcester Road SWDP23/26 Land between High Street and Weston Road SWDP9/7 Canal Basin Project SWDP9/1 Vines Lane SWDP9/2 Land east of Salwarpe Road, between canal & River Salwarpe SWDP11/4 Employment Site, top of Kings Road SWDP23/25 Land west of Worcester Road 37-N16 Land to the West of Abbey Road, South of Boat Lane 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 33

54 5.2.3 Sewage Treatment Works Table 5-3 comprises the results of the STW assessment at the five main sewage treatment works in terms of current DWF, population equivalent, current quality performance and any physical constraints regarding the proposed site allocations. Worcester and Evesham sewage treatment works are currently performing well and there are no quality issues or physical constraints associated with the provision of additional treatment capacity. The other three sewage treatment works have marginal quality issues, although there are no physical restraints associated with providing additional treatment capacity. However, the assessment of Powick sewage treatment works showed that there is an issue with the current sizing of the biological filters which may result in an increased stress on the system. This would require assessment and possible upgrading should development mean additional treatment capacity is required. However, the revisions to the South Worcestershire proposed developments have meant less additional dwellings treated at Powick than reported in the 2010 WCS and therefore STW do not envisage any issues in dealing with any future growth demand Consent references and conditions Table 5-4 contains the current consent references and conditions for the five main sewage treatment works. All of the sewage treatment works comply with the DWF. As with the 2010 WCS all of the sewage plants have no physical constraints to provide additional treatment capacity and generally have a good quality performance so therefore there should not be any issues with this exceedance in DWF as long as STW are working towards continual improvement and compliance. Table 5-4 also records the consent conditions for Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Suspended Solids (SS) and Phosphates (P). 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 34

55 Table 5-3: Results of the STW assessment for each site* Sewage Treatment Works Name Current OS Grid Ref / observe Current d dry PE weather Easting Northing PE flow (m 3 /d) Estimated spare hydraulic capacity Dwellings (@ 2.4hd/ dwelling) Current treatment process Current quality performance (RAG) Future quality issues (RAG) Physical constraints regarding provision of additional treatment capacity (RAG) Severn Trent sewage treatment comments Droitwich ,138 7, Act Sludge - Diff Air / Recirc Filt Marginal None expected to be an issue No land or other constraints preventing expansion There is negligible hydraulic headroom at this sewage works but we do not envisage any issues in dealing with future growth needs in the catchment. As part of the EA's National Environment Programme we are expecting to meet the new 2mg/l P consent by Sept Evesham ,737 4,684 6,959 2,900 Re- Circulating Filtration Good None expected to be an issue No land or other constraints preventing expansion Comparison of current measured dry weather flow (DWF) against the consented DWF indicates that there is reasonable hydraulic capacity at this site. Notwithstanding this we do not envisage any issues in dealing with additional growth at Evesham STW. Malvern ,342 8,160 28,827 12,010 Re- Circulating Filtration Marginal None expected to be an issue No land or other constraints preventing expansion Comparison of current measured DWF against the consented DFW indicates that there is reasonable hydraulic capacity at this site. Notwithstanding this we do not envisage any issues in dealing with additional growth at Malvern STW. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 35

56 Sewage Treatment Works Name Current OS Grid Ref / observe Current d dry PE weather Easting Northing PE flow (m 3 /d) Estimated spare hydraulic capacity Dwellings (@ 2.4hd/ dwelling) Current treatment process Current quality performance (RAG) Future quality issues (RAG) Physical constraints regarding provision of additional treatment capacity (RAG) Severn Trent sewage treatment comments Pershore , ,876 3,700 Act Sludge - Diffused Air Marginal None expected to be an issue No land or other constraints preventing expansion Comparison of current measured DWF against the consented DWF indicates that there is reasonable hydraulic capacity at this site. Notwithstanding this we do not envisage any issues in dealing with additional growth. Powick , Worcester ,515 28,666 (See Comme nts) 3,075 (See comm ents) See comm ents 1,280 (See comments ) See comments Re- Circulating Filtration Act Sludge - Diffused Air Marginal Good *Table provided by Severn Trent Water (2012) None expected to be an issue None expected to be an issue No land or other constraints preventing expansion No land or other constraints preventing expansion Comparison of current measured DWF against the consented DWF indicates that there is reasonable hydraulic capacity at this site; however the current sizing data for the biological filters indicate there could be stress from a load perspective. Notwithstanding this we do not envisage any issues in dealing with future growth demand. Comparison of current measured DWF against the consented DWF indicates that there is low hydraulic capacity at this site; however the current sizing of the ASP Diffused Air Plant indicates that there is hydraulic capacity available which indicates there could be a problem with measured DWF data. Actual spare capacity needs further detailed process analysis but notwithstanding this we do not envisage any issues in dealing with future growth demand. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 36

57 Table 5-4: Current consent references for each site and consent conditions* Current Consent Information Sewage Treatment Works Name Receiving Watercourse River Catchment Consent Reference Flows that exceed the design flow for full treatment (FFT) DWF (m 3 /day) Ammonia (Summer) Ammonia (Winter) Biological Oxygen Demand (mg/l) Suspended Solids (mg/l) Phosphorous (P) Droitwich River Salwarpe Middle Severn S/07/55591/R 16,848 7, n/a See Comments in Table 5-3 Evesham River Avon Middle Severn S/17/26427/R 16,330 5, Malvern River Severn Middle Severn S/08/26522/R 20,460 13, Pershore Bow Brook Middle Severn S/19/26007/R 7,638 3, Powick Carey's Brook Middle Severn S/08/25693/R 6,653 2, Worcester River Severn Middle Severn S/07/56066/R 33, *Table provided by Severn Trent Water (2012) 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 37

58 5.2.5 Sewage treatment works capacity and ecological status The capacity issues described in Table 5-3 and Table 5-4 are derived from the original 2010 WCS although these values are still relevant as very few changes are expected according to STW. In fact, they suggest that there may even be some improvements due to changes in DWF. Whilst this information was unavailable for the other sewage treatment works, Severn Trent Water has provided a statement to confirm they will complete necessary improvements to provide any additional capacity requirements once there is sufficient confidence the development will go ahead, and will ensure that their assets will have no adverse effect on the environment. The full statement is provided in Appendix C. In lieu of consent references and conditions for all the sewage treatment works, an analysis has been undertaken investigating the Water Framework Directive (WFD) condition of the receiving watercourses. This investigation has looked at the condition of the receiving watercourse and the increase in dwellings discharging to the treatment works. The results of the assessment are provided in Table 5-5. All the receiving watercourses are currently classed as failing with the majority of the receiving water bodies classed as moderate overall WFD status, with a small number classed as poor and one classed as bad. Further information regarding WFD classifications is available in the Severn River Basin Management Plan 15. Where development will result in a large increase in dwellings discharging to a sewage treatment works, developers should liaise with Severn Trent Water and the Environment Agency to ensure there will be no unfavourable impact upon the receiving water body, and no sites should be developed until the appropriate infrastructure is in place. 15 Environment Agency (December 2009) Water for life and livelihoods: River Basin Management Plan Severn River Basin District 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 38

59 Site Allocations Number of additional dwellings Table 5-5: Development sites, sewage treatment works and WFD status of receiving water bodies Sewage Treatment Works catchment Receiving watercourse WFD status of receiving waterbody (2009) SWDP24/25 SWDP24/26 20 Sale Green Bow Bk - Shell to conf R Avon (Brist) Moderate SWDP23/2 SWDP23/1 16 Abberley Common Shrawley Bk - source to conf R Severn Moderate SWDP25/1 13 Alfrick Clay Green R Teme - conf R Onny to conf R Severn Moderate SWDP24/ Ashton under Hill Carrant Bk - source to conf Washbourne Bk Poor Beckford Carrant Bk - conf Washbourne Bk to conf RIver Avon Poor Bidford on Avon R Arrow - conf R Alne to conf R Avon Poor Bishampton Whitsunn Bk - source to conf Piddle Bk Moderate LP1 SWDP25/ SWDP24/24 SWDP24/9 SWDP24/ SWDP23/32 SWDP23/31 SWDP23/30 SWDP23/ Blackminster Badsey Bk - conf Bretforton Bk to conf R Avon Moderate SWDP25/ SWDP23/19 43 Bredon R Avon conf Workman Br, Evesham to conf R Severn Moderate SWDP23/ /14 SWDP23/23 SWDP23/22 SWDP23/ Broadway Badsey Bk - source to conf Bretforton Bk Moderate SWDP23/3 30 Clifton upon Teme Sapey Bk - source to conf R Teme No information available 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 39

60 Site Allocations Number of additional dwellings Sewage Treatment Works catchment Receiving watercourse WFD status of receiving waterbody (2009) SWDP24/ SWDP24/10 20 Cropthorne Heath R Avon conf Workman Br, Evesham to conf R Severn Moderate SWDP25/4 25 Crowle Worcester Bow Bk - Shell to conf R Avon (Brist) Moderate SWDP25/6 SWDP24/16 SWDP9/7 SWDP9/2 SWDP9/1 SWDP9/6 SWDP9/5 SWDP9/4 SWDP9/3 2012SC 11 Defford Bow Bk - Shell to conf R Avon (Brist) Moderate 690 Droitwich Ladywood R Salwarpe - conf Elmbridge Bk to conf R Severn Moderate SWDP24/14 20 Eckington R Avon conf Workman Br, Evesham to conf R Severn Moderate 37-N16 SWDP12/2 SWDP12/1 SWDP11/4 SWDP11/3 SWDP11/1 Adj 37-N03 37-N21 37-N17 SWDP VPx SWDP12/3 1,199 Evesham R Avon conf Workman Br, Evesham to conf R Severn Moderate 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 40

61 Site Allocations Number of additional dwellings Sewage Treatment Works catchment Receiving watercourse WFD status of receiving waterbody (2009) SWDP24/18 12 Flyford Flavell Piddle Bk - source to conf Whitsunn Bk Poor SWDP23/4 23 Great Witley Shrawley Bk - source to conf R Severn Moderate MHHA14 46 Hallow Laughern Bk - source to conf R Teme Poor SWDP24/19 15 Harvington Harvington Bk - source to conf R Avon Poor SWDP21/1 25 Holly Green Works R Severn - conf R Teme to conf R Avon Poor SWDP23/26 SWDP23/ Honeybourne Cow Honeybourne Bk - source to conf Bretforton Bk Bad SWDP23/ Inkberrow Piddle Bk - source to conf Whitsunn Bk Poor MHKY33 SWDP23/7 SWDP23/9 138 Kempsey Works R Severn - conf R Teme to conf R Avon Poor Kidderminster 100 R Stour (Worcs) - conf Smestow Bk to conf R Severn Moderate SWDP23/25 Oldington SWDP25/10 10 Lower Moor R Avon conf Workman Br, Evesham to conf R Severn Moderate SWDP17 SWDP16 SWDP14 SWDP13/4 SWDP13/1 SWDP13/9 SWDP13/8 SWDP13/7 SWDP13/6 SWDP13/5 SWDP13/2 SWDP13/3 SWDP15 SWDP13/11 SWDP13/12 SWDP13/13 SWDP13/10 1,205 Malvern Madresfield Bk - source to conf R Severn Moderate 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 41

62 Site Allocations Number of additional dwellings Sewage Treatment Works catchment Receiving watercourse WFD status of receiving waterbody (2009) SWDP23/13 SWDP23/14 51 Martley Ductons Copp Laughern Bk - source to conf R Teme Poor SWDP23/33 SWDP23/34 39 Ombersley Hadley Bk - source to conf R Salwarpe Moderate Pebworth Noleham Bk - source to conf R Avon Moderate SWDP18/1 SWDP18/7 SWDP18/6 SWDP18/4 SWDP18/3 SWDP18/ SWDP24/23 SWDP24/22 SWDP24/ SWDP24/13 SWDP24/11 SWDP19/1 834 Pershore Bow Bk - Shell to conf R Avon (Brist) Moderate MHPW06 SWDP24/6 SWDP24/5 SWDP24/3 SWDP23/5 SWDP23/ MHTW14 SWDP20/1 138 Powick Careys Bk - source to conf R Severn Moderate 40 Quay Lane R Severn - conf R Teme to conf R Avon Poor 20 Sedgeberrow R Isbourne - conf Laverton Bk to conf R Avon Poor 70 Tenbury R Teme - conf R Onny to conf R Severn Moderate 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 42

63 Site Allocations Number of additional dwellings Sewage Treatment Works catchment Receiving watercourse WFD status of receiving waterbody (2009) MHTH10 18 Upton on Severn Pool Bk - ocnfluence Mere Bk to conf R Severn Poor SWDP24/27 32 Upton Snodsbury Piddle Bk - source to conf Whitsunn Bk Poor MHWD10 10 Welland MarlBank Bk - source to conf Bushley Bk Poor SWDP6/NEWH SWDP6/4 WO93 SWDP8/2 SWDP8/1 SWDP7/6 SWDP7/5 SWDP7/4 SWDP6/22 SWDP6/21 SWDP6/20 SWDP6/19 SWDP6/17 SWDP6/15 SWDP6/14 SWDP6/13 SWDP6/12 SWDP8/4 SWDP6/6 SWDP6/NEWE SWDP6/NEWD SWDP6/NEWC SWDP6/NEWF SWDP6/NEWA SWDP6/NEWB SWDP6/1 SWDP8/3 SWDP6/9 SWDP6/8 SWDP6/7 SWDP6/5 SWDP6/3 SWDP6/23 SWDP6/2 SWDP6/11 5,658 Worcester Bromwich Road R Severn - conf R Stour to conf RIver Teme Moderate 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 43

64 Site Allocations SWDP6/10 SWDP24/2 SWDP23/15 SWDP23/17 SWDP23/16 SWDP23/10 SWDP23/12 SWDP23/11 SWDP6/NEWI SWDP6/NEWJ SWDP8/5 SWDP6/18 SWDP6/16 SWDP6/16 SWDP7/3 SWDP7/2 29wy-02 SWDP23/35 Number of additional dwellings Sewage Treatment Works catchment Receiving watercourse WFD status of receiving waterbody (2009) 120 Wychbold R Salwarpe to conf Elmbridge Bk Moderate 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 44

65 5.3 Foul drainage provision in non-sewered areas Three of the proposed allocations are located in non-sewered areas (areas not served by public sewerage). These are Bayton (5 dwellings) Clows Top (17 dwellings) Himbleton (6 dwellings) Planning requirements for non-mains drainage are detailed in Circular 3/99 16, which sets out a hierarchy of the best types of foul drainage provision. Circular 3/99 provides advice on the exercise of planning controls on non-mains sewerage and associated sewage disposal aspects of future development so as to avoid environmental, amenity or public health problems which could arise from the inappropriate use of non-mains sewerage systems, particularly those incorporating septic tanks. 16. Circular 3//99 describes how developers are required to make a full assessment of the suitability of any proposals for non-mains sewerage systems at the project design stage. This assessment includes: 1. The first presumption should always be to provide a system of foul drainage discharging into a public sewer 2. If, taking into account the cost and/or practicability, it can be shown (the the satisfaction of the local planning authority) that connection to a public sewer is not feasible, a package treatment plant incorporating a combination of treatment processes should be considered. The plant should offer full treatment with the final effluent discharge from it meeting the standard and conditions set by the Environment Agency. The proposal for a package plant should also set out clearly the responsibility and means of operation and maintenance to ensure the discharge consent is met throughout the life of the plant. This may be achieved by having the treatment plant including, if necessary, any associated sewers by the sewerage undertaker under section 104 of the Water Industry Act Only if it can be clearly demonstrated by the developer that the sewerage and sewage disposal methods referred to above are not feasible, taking into account cost and/or practicability, should a system incorporating septic tank(s) be considered. Applications for planning permission should be supported by a full assessment of the proposed use of septic tanks, to confirm the adverse effects listed below will not arise. Contravention of recognised practices Adverse effect on water sources/resources Health hazard or nuisance Damage to controlled waters Damage to the environment and amenity Overloading the existing capacity of the area Absence of suitable outlets Unsuitable soakage characteristics High water table Rising ground water levels Flooding More information on these adverse effects is provided in Circular 3/ The assessment should focus on the likely effects on the environment, amenity and public health. It should also include a thorough examination of the impact of disposal of the final effluent, whether it is discharged to a watercourse or disposed of by soakage into the ground. 16 Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1999) Circular 3/99: Planning Requirement in respect of the Use of Non-Mains Sewerage incorporating Septic Tanks in New Development. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 45

66 Note on cesspools: A properly constructed and maintained cesspool, in principle, should not lead to environmental, amenity or public health problems. However, in practice problems occur such as overflows due to poor maintenance, irregular emptying and inadequate capacity, or any of the adverse effects listed above. Therefore, an assessment of suitability similar to that describes above should be undertaken. 5.4 Constraints and limitations The data and comments provided by STW are desktop assessments based on readily available information and no hydraulic modelling was undertaken. There is limited data available on the specific notional schemes for foul sewer improvements and therefore storage volume estimates and costing are not included within this report. Additionally, STW was unable to commit figures and detailed information on the new proposed site allocations, due to a lack of detailed plans of proposed development. 5.5 Conclusions Severn Trent Water have a statutory obligation to provide additional treatment capacity to accept future domestic development flows, and operate their sewage treatment works efficiently which means that there is very little spare capacity. No physical restraints to upgrades of the sewage treatment works were identified in the 2010 WCS. Severn Trent Water would not usually invest in additional treatment capacity until a development has outline planning permission and they usually require 3-4 years to allow for any major additional capacity improvements, with minor improvements likely to be completed sooner. Many of the proposed site allocations will require investment in the sewerage infrastructure and the solutions and costs will need to be reassessed after the final allocations and dwelling numbers are confirmed. Sewerage infrastructure capacity improvements are usually initiated once a developer agrees to fund the required improvements and would normally take up to 12 months to complete. One option for creating additional capacity within public foul and surface water sewerage systems is the removal of surface water connections, providing alternative, more sustainable routes for surface water drainage can be provided. Delivery of such a strategy for surface water management would require close co-operation between the planning authorities, Worcestershire County Council and Severn Trent Water. Where proposed allocated are located in non-sewered areas, developers are required to make a full assessment of the suitability of any proposals for non-mains sewerage systems at the project design stage, as outlined in Circular 3/99, so as to avoid environmental, amenity or public health problems. Whilst an indication of possible phasing of sites has been provided, this is based on a broad scale assessment of sewerage infrastructure alone and does not include assessment of additional capacity requirements at sewage treatment works or ecological status of receiving waterbodies. The phasing of sites is uncertain and gaps in the data will require investigating before sites can be brought forward. 5.6 Recommendations If more detailed information is made available regarding the plans for the development sites then this can be used to determine the additional foul flow required for treatment and consequently several notional schemes can be drafted to improve the sewerage infrastructure with estimated costs and storage volumes. It is recommended that hydraulic modelling is carried out in order to improve the accuracy of these estimates and to gain a better understanding of the change in DWF and the impact the proposed developments could have on local sub-catchments. Modelling of the sewer network on the wider strategy area will probably be undertaken by Severn Trent Water; however, the developer is required to do modelling of the sewer network on their site. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 46

67 Water quality It is recommended that the South Worcestershire Councils adopt a policy relating to developments, sewerage capacity and WFD status, to ensure sites are not be developed until suitable infrastructure is in place and sufficient additional capacity is available at the treatment works to ensure no detrimental impact on the WFD status of the receiving watercourse. Non-sewered areas The three proposed developments located in non-sewered areas (Bayton, Clows Top and Himbleton) will require a full assessment of the suitability for non-mains sewerage systems. As connection to a public sewer is not considered feasible then a package treatment plant should be considered. Only if this option is clearly demonstrated as not feasible should a septic tank be considered, supported by a full assessment of the proposed use of septic tanks, to confirm adverse effects listed in Circular 3/99 will not arise. It is recommended that, even before a planning application is made, the applicant has informal discussions with the local planning authority, EA and sewerage undertaker. The local planning authority should also make the applicant aware of the contents of Circular 3/99. It is also recommended the South Worcestershire Councils adopt a policy relating to development in non-sewered areas to reflect the contents of Circular 3/99 and ensure a full assessment of the suitability of any proposals for non-mains sewerage systems at the project design stage is undertaken so as to avoid environmental, amenity or public health problems. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 47

68 6 Water resources and supply 6.1 Introduction The current cycle of CAMS show South Worcestershire to be a particularly water-stressed region as water demand is quite high and water supply is limited. An abstraction licence from the EA is required to abstract a minimum of 20m 3 /day from a supply source (e.g. river, stream, well, lake). The EA can impose restrictions on some of these licences such as a Hands-off Flow (HOF) restriction which is usually defined as Q95 flow (the flow that is exceeded 95% of the time). If the flow in the river drops below the Q95 flow then abstractions will cease. Before a new licence can be granted or a time-restricted licence can be extended, the EA requires that they meet strict criteria and local considerations are accounted for. As of 15 th July 2012, under Section of the Water Act 2003, the EA are able to alter the volumes and conditions on new and existing licences. These new powers enable more efficient water resources management and help to cope with predicted climate change impacts. Other new regulations have been imposed since the original 2010 WCS report, including the licensing of tickle irrigation of crops. Spray irrigation was already licensable but tougher restrictions are more likely to be needed in order to meet future water demand. 6.1 Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies (CAMS) The CAMS relevant to the South Worcestershire area are: Worcester CAMS (2006) Warwickshire Avon CAMS (2006) Severn Corridor CAMS (2007) Teme CAMS, Worcestershire (2005) Middle Severn CAMS (2007) Severn Vale CAMS (2008) The four categories that are used in CAMS reports to identify the status of surface water, groundwater resources and licence availability within a catchment are listed in Table Indicative Resource Availability Status Water Available No Water Available Over Licensed Over Abstracted Table 6-1: Resource Availability Status Categories Licence Availability Water is likely to be available at all flows including low flows. Restrictions may apply. No water is available for further licensing at low flows. Water may be available at higher flows with appropriate restrictions. Current actual abstraction is such that no water is available at low flows. If existing licences were used to their full allocation they could cause unacceptable environmental damage at low flows. Water may be available at high flows, with appropriate restrictions. Existing abstraction is causing unacceptable damage to the environment at low flows. Water may still be available at high flows, with appropriate restrictions. 17 Water Act (2003) 18 The Warwickshire Avon Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (June 2006) 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 48

69 Table 6-2 is taken from the 2010 WCS and shows how water availability is limited within the South Worcestershire area. Proposed Strategic Site Allocations Worcester Droitwich Spa Great Malvern Pershore Evesham Table 6-2: Water Resources Availability (taken from 2010 WCS Report) Current Resource Availability Status* No Water Available No Water Available Over Abstracted No Water Available No Water Available Over Abstracted No Water Available No Water Available No Water Available No Water Available Target Resource Availability 2018/19 No Water Available No Water Available Over Abstracted No Water Available No Water Available No Water Available No Water Available No Water Available No Water Available No Water Available Rivers River Severn River Teme and Laughern Brook River Salwarpe and Hadley Brook Careys Brook River Severn Bow Brook to the north of Tiddesley Wood Bow Brook from the north edge of Tiddesley Wood and the River Avon Piddle Brook River Avon River Avon and River Isbourne CAMS Water Resource Management Unit (WRMU) Unit 6 River Stour confluence to River Teme confluence Teme WRMU Unit 2 Rivers Worfe, Stour and Salwarpe Unit 1 Severn Vale North West Tributaries Unit 7- River Teme Confluence to Saxons Lode Besford Bridge Upper Pound Wyre Piddle Evesham Upper Pound Tenbury Wells No Water Available No Water Available River Teme Teme WRMU Upton upon Severn No Water Available No Water Available River Severn Unit 7- River Teme Confluence to Saxons Lode Note: At the time of writing of this addendum report, the new Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy reports had not yet been published. The new CAMS have since been published in February 2013 and developers should consult these as sites are brought forward. The 2010s WCS summarised the licensing strategy for the South Worcestershire area as: To improve the status of surface water resources in the South Worcestershire area the EA CAMS state that for most areas no new licences will be granted for low flows, licences at higher flows will have strict restrictions and in some cases no licences will be granted at any flow level. To improve the status of groundwater resources no new abstraction licences will be granted. Renewal of existing surface water and groundwater licences may be subject to more stringent conditions than previously. Next cycle of CAMS (2013) The Environment Agency provided some details of the proposed licensing strategies expected in the next cycle of CAMS. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 49

70 The main licensing strategies proposed in the updated CAMS are that Hands-Off Flows are implemented across the catchments. The HOF value is determined by the Q90 flow on the flow duration curve. For instances where the EA s modelling has produced a less restrictive flow, this has been superseded with the Q90 flow. Conversely, where EA s models have resulted in a more restrictive flow, the current abstraction licence would still hold true in order to avoid unlawful derogation. There are time limits on all new and varied licences ranging from Assessment of water supply availability for sites proposed in the SWDP The 2010 WCS concluded that investment would be required to the water supply infrastructure for it to be able to accommodate the site allocations. Severn Trent Water would not usually invest in additional treatment capacity until a development has outline planning permission and they usually require 3-4 years to allow for any major additional capacity improvements with minor improvements likely to be completed sooner. Table 6-3 is taken from the 2010 WCS. It shows that all of the sites assessed as part of the 2010 WCS fall within an amber category meaning investment would be required to accommodate the proposed allocations and an estimated 12 months required for upgrade. Severn Trent Water was contacted, as part of this 2012 update, to provide an update of this assessment. They confirmed an allocation of funding has been identified to meet the cost of schemes to reinforce areas affected by development in the South Worcester Region, based on a STW internal review carried out to identify investment needs for the remainder of the current AMP and for the next AMP covering STW confirmed the investment and phasing requirements for the sites proposed for the SWDP are very similar to the 2010 WCS and therefore recommend the sites should fall in the amber category, requiring a minimum of 12 months for upgrading the water supply infrastructure. As funding has been allocated it will give confidence that, provided there is sufficient notice, STW will be in a position to provide water supply and they therefore suggest that all of the SWDP sites should be allocated the amber category. Whilst there are no details of the phasing of projects, the situation can be continually monitored by STW with regards to when development takes place, to phase the pipeline schemes accordingly and bring forward schemes as required. 6.3 Constraints and limitations Since the 2010 WCS there is limited new data available on water resources and supply. However, STW have indicated there is little change in water supply requirements and limitations since the previous study, even with the changes to allocations for the SWDP. The data and comments provided by STW are desktop assessments based on readily available information and no hydraulic modelling was undertaken. Without more detailed plans of the proposed development, STW was unable to commit any more data or detailed information on the new proposed site allocation. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 50

71 Table 6-3: 2010 Water Cycle Strategy - Summary of Investment required to the Water Supply Infrastructure Proposed Strategic Site Allocations Worcester Worcester North West Worcester North Kilbury Drive Worcester South Fernhill Heath Droitwich Spa Hill End 19 Pulley Lane Copcut Lane Great Malvern Malvern North Malvern East Malvern South Blackmore Park Pershore Pershore Evesham Offenham Road Cheltenham Road Hampton Legend: (Investment/Phasing) Investment Water Supply Proposed strategic site allocations cannot be accommodated / maximum 3-4 years required for upgrade Investment is required to accommodate proposed strategic site allocations / 12 months required for upgrade No Investment required/current system can accommodate the proposed strategic site allocations Has not been assessed but investment likely to be required / 12 months is likely to be required to accommodate proposed strategic site allocations Phasing 6.4 Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH) From 1 st May 2008 it has been mandatory for all new homes to be rated against the Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSHs). The CfSHs is an environmental assessment method for rating and certifying the performance of new homes and covers nine categories of sustainable design. The category relevant to the WCS is Category 2: Water. The two aims of Category 2 are: 19 Hill End is now excluded. However, it has been included in this report as a record of the assessment. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 51

72 1. to reduce the consumption of potable water in the home from all sources, including borehole well water, through the use of water efficiency fittings, appliances and water recycling systems. 2. to promote the recycling of rainwater and reduce the amount of mains potable water used for external water uses. Examples of how to these aims are met include: Delayed inlet valves Flow restrictors Grey-water recycling Ion exchange water softeners Low flush WCs Rainwater recycling More details about the CfSHs is provided in Section 8.3 of the 2010 WCS report. 6.5 Conclusions and recommendations Severn Trent Water has a statutory obligation to provide additional treatment capacity to accept future domestic development flows and has to provide further water supply. There appears to be no physical restraints to upgrades of the water supply infrastructure based on the previous WCS as well as the STW comments. Investment will be required to the water supply infrastructure for it to be able to accommodate the proposed site allocations. Severn Trent Water have an allocation of funding identified to meet the cost of schemes to reinforce areas affected by development in the South Worcestershire area for the remainder of the current AMP and for the next AMP covering Funding to enable the required investments in water supply infrastructure is primarily funded through domestic and non-domestic water bills. Any site specific upgrades to the water supply infrastructure will be expected to be funded by developer contribution. Demand management options are a vital consideration when planning and building the new developments to provide sustainability both in terms of the aquatic environment and water supply. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 52

73 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 53

74 7 Conclusions, recommendations and policy 7.1 Summary of work undertaken A review of the 2010 Water Cycle Study has been undertaken and shown the majority of the main findings still stand and are applicable today. 20 However, an update was required to assess changes to the SWDP allocation sites, where some sites were removed, additional sites included and modifications to some sites. Severn Trent Water provided a broadscale assessment of the proposed site allocations likely impact on wastewater and water supply infrastructure. At this stage, with no detailed plans of the sites, it is not possible for STW to undertake hydraulic modelling or provide more detailed assessment or costing. The analysis in the 2010 WCS and this 2012 Update takes a demand based approach and therefore growth comes with some hidden costs, partly met through water bills. Resourcebased planning would be an alternative approach. However, South Worcestershire is a waterscarce region within no water available or over-abstracted categories, which might mean restricting development Limitations This Water Cycle Study update is based on the South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Options (September 2011) and Proposed Significant Changes to the Preferred Options plan (August 2012). This is consistent with the 2012 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment update. The South Worcestershire Councils have since published the South Worcestershire Development Plan: Proposed Submission Document in January 2013 and some sites that have been assessed as part of this Water Cycle Study have not been taken forward into the South Worcestershire Development Plan. The data and comments provided by STW are desktop assessments based on readily available information and no hydraulic modelling was undertaken. Without more detailed plans of the proposed development, STW was unable to commit any more data or detailed information on the new proposed site allocation. There is limited data available on the specific notional schemes for foul sewer improvements and therefore storage volume estimates and costing are not included within this report. Since the 2010 WCS there is limited new data available on water resources and supply. However, STW have indicated there is little change in water supply requirements and limitations since the previous study, even with the changes to allocations for the SWDP. Limited information relating to consent references and conditions, and spare capacity at the sewage treatment works was available for this update. In lieu of consent references and conditions for all the sewage treatment works, an analysis has been undertaken investigating the Water Framework Directive (WFD) condition of the receiving watercourses. 7.2 Conclusions and recommendations Severn Trent Water has a statutory obligation to provide additional treatment capacity to accept future domestic development flows and has to provide further water supply so there no foreseen issues. There appears to be no physical restraints to upgrades of the water supply infrastructure based on the previous WCS as well as the Severn Trent Water comments Sewerage infrastructure Many of the proposed site allocations will require investment in the sewerage infrastructure and the solutions and costs will need to be reassessed after the final allocations and dwelling numbers are confirmed. Sewerage infrastructure capacity improvements are usually initiated 20 At the time of writing of this addendum report, the new Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy reports had not yet been published. The new CAMS have since been published in February 2013 and developers should consult these as sites are brought forward. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 54

75 once a developer agrees to fund the required improvements and would normally take up to 12 months to complete. If more detailed information is made available regarding the plans for the development sites then this can be used to determine the additional foul flow required for treatment and consequently several notional schemes can be drafted to improve the sewerage infrastructure with estimated costs and storage volumes. It is recommended that hydraulic modelling is carried out in order to improve the accuracy of these estimates and to gain a better understanding of the change in DWF and the impact the proposed developments could have on local sub-catchments. In lieu of consent references and conditions for all the sewage treatment works, an analysis was been undertaken investigating the Water Framework Directive (WFD) condition of the receiving watercourses. The results of the assessment show all the receiving watercourses are currently classed as failing with the majority of the receiving water bodies classed as moderate overall WFD status, with a small number classed as poor and one classed as bad. Whilst an indication of possible phasing of sites has been provided, this is based on a broad scale assessment of sewerage infrastructure alone and does not include assessment of additional capacity requirements at sewage treatment works or ecological status of receiving waterbodies. The phasing of sites is uncertain and gaps in the data will require investigating before sites can be brought forward. Non-sewered areas The three proposed developments located in non-sewered areas (Bayton, Clows Top and Himbleton) will require a full assessment of the suitability for non-mains sewerage systems. As connection to a public sewer is not considered feasible then a package treatment plant should be considered. Only if this option is clearly demonstrated as not feasible should a septic tank be considered, supported by a full assessment of the proposed use of septic tanks, to confirm adverse effects listed in Circular 3/99 will not arise. It is recommended that, even before a planning application is made, the applicant has informal discussions with the local planning authority, EA and sewerage undertaker. The local planning authority should also make the applicant aware of the contents of Circular 3/99. It is also recommended the South Worcestershire Councils adopt a policy relating to development in non-sewered areas to reflect the contents of Circular 3/99 and ensure a full assessment of the suitability of any proposals for non-mains sewerage systems at the project design stage is undertaken so as to avoid environmental, amenity or public health problems Water resource and supply Investment will be required to the water supply infrastructure for it to be able to accommodate the proposed site allocations. Severn Trent Water have an allocation of funding identified to meet the cost of schemes to reinforce areas affected by development in the South Worcester Region for the remainder of the current AMP and for the next AMP covering Any site specific upgrades to the water supply infrastructure will be expected to be funded by developer contribution. Demand management options are a vital consideration when planning and building the new developments to provide sustainability both in terms of the aquatic environment and water supply. At the time of writing of this addendum report, the new Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy reports had not yet been published. The new CAMS have since been published in February 2013 and developers should consult these as sites are brought forward. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 55

76 7.3 Policy The following policy is taken from the 2010 Water Cycle Study and is still recommended for the South Worcestershire area. An important constraint to development in the South Worcestershire that has been identified in the 2010 WCS and this 2012 Update is the scarcity of water resources and the limited abstraction licences available. A Greywater Recycling Policy was developed, in conjunction with the South Worcestershire Councils, for the 2010 WCS to limit the impact of the proposed strategic site allocations on the water resources. The policy is outlined below and is based on the Code for Sustainable Homes definition of greywater recycling. WATER RESOURCES POLICY All new development units will be restricted to a maximum water usage of 105 litres/person/day for indoor potable water and 5% of units within a development will be required to achieve a maximum water usage of 90 litres/person/day for indoor potable water. Rainwater harvesting and/or greywater recycling systems will be a requirement for all new development units. Reasoned Justification: As water resources are scarce in the South Worcestershire area, demand management options are a vital consideration when planning and building new developments in order to provide sustainability both in terms of the aquatic environment and water supply. In line with the current view from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) it is recommended that new residential developments within the proposed strategic site allocations strive to achieve a Level 3 under the Code for Sustainable Homes, a level of no more than 105 litres/person/day (l/p/d). The definition of Greywater Recycling for this policy is the appropriate collection, treatment and storage of used shower, bath and tap water for use, instead of potable water, in WCs and/or washing machines. Greywater recycling systems normally collect used shower, bath and tap water and recycle this for toilet flushing. The definition of Rainwater Harvesting Systems for this policy recommendation includes the use of water butts for outdoor water use as well as for use instead of potable water in WCs and/or washing machines. The incorporation of rainwater harvesting systems as standard in all new developments will not only increase efficiency in the home but can also contribute to a reduction in surface water runoff. It is important to strive to achieve additional water savings, leading to 5% of all development units being required to achieve the upper tier of the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 of no more than 90 l/p/d by It should be noted that there are several relatively cheap and simple water conservation devices, such as low flow taps, aerated showers, low flush toilets and simple rainwater butts that may be sufficient to achieve 105l/p/d and should be considered before the more expensive systems. However, to achieve 90 l/p/d the installation of more complex rainwater harvesting or greywater recycling systems may also be required where options for improving the efficiency of terminal fittings (taps, toilets etc) have been maximised. Shared systems can be utilised to reduce the per unit cost of greywater or rainwater harvesting systems, for example communal systems can be installed in apartment blocks. The information below is a selection of options available to developers to achieve the required target levels. This is by no means an exhaustive list. Water Efficient Shower Heads Dual flush toilets Reduced flow rate taps 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 56

77 Water Efficient appliances, e.g dishwasher and washing machines All new developments are required to incorporate a rainwater harvesting or greywater recycling system which could consist of, but is not limited, to one of the following options: Rainwater harvesting systems: o Internal systems (e.g. feeding washing machines and/or toilets) o External systems (e.g. Water Butts, for watering the garden, car washing etc) o Combination systems (internal and external use) Greywater recycling systems: o Direct reuse systems (no treatment) e.g. bath water used directly for watering gardens o Short retention systems (take wastewater from the bath or shower and apply a basic treatment technique such as skimming debris off the surface and allowing particles to settle to the bottom of the tank and stores for a short period of time) o Biological systems (bacteria are used to remove organic material from wastewater) o Bio-mechanical systems (The most advanced domestic greywater treatment systems that use a combination of biological and physical treatment) Non-sewered areas policy In addition to the water resource policy carried forward from the previous Water Cycle Study, it is recommended an additional policy relating to non-sewered areas should be implemented by the South Worcestershire councils. NON-SEWERED AREAS POLICY Proposed development in non-sewered areas should undergo a full assessment of the suitability of any proposals for non-main sewerage systems at the project design stage, as laid out in Circular 3/ The first presumption should always be to provide a system of foul drainage discharging into a public sewer 2. If, taking into account the cost and/or practicability, it can be shown (the the satisfaction of the local planning authority) that connection to a public sewer is not feasible, a package treatment plant incorporating a combination of treatment processes should be considered. The plant should offer full treatment with the final effluent discharge from it meeting the standard and conditions set by the Environment Agency. 3. Only if it can be clearly demonstrated by the developer that the sewerage and sewage disposal methods referred to above are not feasible, taking into account cost and/or practicability, should a system incorporating septic tank(s) be considered. Applications for planning permission should be supported by a full assessment of the proposed use of septic tanks, to confirm the adverse effects listed in Circular 3/99 and this document will not arise. Before deciding a planning application, the South Worcestershire councils need to be satisfied that the sewerage arrangements are suitable. If the non-mains sewerage and sewerage disposal proposals are assessed as being unsatisfactory, Circular 3/99 states this would normally be sufficient to justify refusal of planning permission s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 57

78 Water quality policy It is recommended that an additional policy relating to water quality should be implemented. Severn Trent Water have provided a statement showing they will complete necessary improvements to provide additional capacity once they have sufficient confidence the development will go ahead, and that they will ensure their assets have no adverse effect on the environment. Developers should liaise closely with Severn Trent Water and the Environment Agency to ensure the appropriate infrastructure is in place to ensure no detrimental impact on receiving water bodies. WATER QUALITY POLICY Developers should work with Severn Trent Water and the Environment Agency to ensure that the appropriate sewerage infrastructure is in place and the sewage treatment works has the capacity to accept additional dwellings without having a detrimental impact on the quality and/or quantity on the receiving water body or bodies. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 58

79 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc 59

80 Appendices 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc I

81 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc II

82 A Proposed HOF strategies in the Warwickshire Avon catchment Current Strategy Proposed Strategy AP1 AP10 AP11 AP13 80Ml/d at Stareton and 1800ML/d at Deerhurst 107Ml/d at Stareton gauging station (River Avon). We need to protect the Q54 at AP1 as this is the flow where the environmental requirements become compromised by abstraction. As there are no suitable gauges at AP1, we propose to continue to use Stareton GS Open, subject to HoFs of 409Ml/d at Evesham and 1800Ml/d at Deerhurst 409Ml/d (HoF4). The next highest HoF above the QG91 is 409Ml/d Open, subject to HoFs of 38Ml/d at Hinton and 1800Ml/d at Deerhurst 12Ml/d (HoF2). The next highest HoF above the QG91 at AP11 is 12.01Ml/d Closed to new abstractions Keep the catchment closed* *Influenced flows have been modelled to be below natural flows throughout the length of the brook to just upstream of the confluence (where the CAMS measurement point is). The compensation scheme at Webheath may have relieved some WR pressure on the catchment but it would be unreasonable to license compensation water for abstraction. 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc III

83 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc IV

84 B Individual SWDP site allocation impact on sewerage infrastructure 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc V

85 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc VI

86 Appendix B: Individual SWDP site allocation impact on sewerage infrastructure South Worcestershire Water Cycle Study Potential impact of proposed developments on sewerage infrastructure assets Date: October 2012 Table supplied by Severn Trent Water (2012) Note: These are desktop assessments using readily available information and have not been subjected to detailed hydraulic modelling Site Ref Site Name Location No of dwellings Employment land (ha) Sewage Treatment Works Catchment SWDP23/1 The Orchard Abberley Common 6 0 Abberley Common SWDP23/2 Land to west of Apostle Oak Cottage Abberley Common 10 0 SWDP25/1 South of Swan Orchard Alfrick 13 0 Alfrick - Clay Green SWDP24/2 Land adj. school Broadwas 10 0 Worcester - Bromwich Road SWDP24/3 Wheatfield Court Callow End 15 0 Powick SWDP13/1 Walsh's Yard, Poolbrook Common Road Great Malvern 5 0 SWDP13/5 Former Recreation Field- Poolbrook Close Great Malvern 12 0 SWDP13/6 Homestead, Halfkey Great Malvern 6 0 SWDP13/7 Portland House Great Malvern 15 0 Malvern SWDP13/8 Land to rear of 12 priory Road Great Malvern 6 0 SWDP13/9 Land off Mayfield road Great Malvern 12 0 SWDP23/5 Land Bet. School & Westmere, Hanley Swan Hanley Swan 20 0 SWDP23/6 Land at Yew Tree Farm, Hanley Swan Hanley Swan 20 0 Quay Lane SWDP21/1 Sunny Meadow Holly Green 25 0 Holly Green Works SWDP23/4 Land adj coalyard & adj to school Great Witley 23 0 Great Witley SWDP23/11 Peachley Court Farm Lower Broadheath 6 0 Worcester - Bromwich Road SWDP23/12 Stand cottages Lower Broadheath 6 0 SWDP13/10 Lower Howsell Road Malvern 6 0 Malvern SWDP13/11 Hospital Site Lansdowne Crescent Malvern 15 0 Sewerage Comment SWDP23/15 Land at Claphill Lane Rushwick 23 0 Worcester - Bromwich Road SWDP23/16 Land at Old Bransford Road Rushwick 20 0 SWDP23/17 Land adj Upperwick Lane Rushwick 15 0 SWDP13/3 Land off Welland Road, Upper Welland Upper Welland 24 0 Malvern MHTH10 Land Off Greenfields Lane, Tunnel Hill, Upton Upon Severn 18 0 Upton on Severn MHWD10 Land at The Pheasant Inn (part) Welland 10 0 Welland SWDP24/1 Land adjoining Severne Green Bayton 5 0 N/A Bayton is not served by public sewers. N/A SWDP25/2 Land adjacent to Highbrae Clows Top 17 0 N/A Clows Top is not served by public sewers N/A SWDP23/3 Land to south of Hope Lane Clifton 30 0 Clifton upon Teme The site is located at the downstream end of the village near to the treatment works. It is not anticipated that capacity improvements will be required. Low SWDP24/5 Off Bowling Green Road Collett's Green 50 0 Powick There are no known capacity issues in the downstream network. The relatively small scale of development should not have a significant impact on sewerage performance. Low SWDP13/2 BMX Track off Mayfield Road Great Malvern 59 0 Malvern There is a foul sewer adjacent to the site and there are no known capacity issues in the downstream network. An additional 59 dwellings is considered to have a low impact on performance. Low MHHA14 Land to north of Orchard Close Hallow 46 0 Hallow The site is likely to connect to the sewerage network to the western boundary. There are no known capacity issues downstream and the site is relatively close to the works. An additional 46 dwellings is unlikely to cause a deterioration Low in network performance. SWDP23/9 West of Lawns Kempsey There is a foul sewer to the east of the site and a surface water sewer crossing the site. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream sewer networks. However, the cumulative impact of these sites on the capacity of the MHKY33 Land at Bight Farm Kempsey 0 0 Kempsey Works sewage pumping station adjacent to the Primary School will need to be checked using hydraulic modelling to ensure Low that there is no impact on the overflow to the adjacent watercourse. Some localised capacity improvements may be SWDP23/7 The Lawns Kempsey 12 0 required. SWDP23/10 Land South of Bell Lane Lower Broadheath 40 0 Worcester - Bromwich Road SWDP13/12 QinetiQ S7T Site St Andrews Rd Malvern 30 0 SWDP14 QinetiQ Malvern SWDP13/13 Barracks Site Geraldine Road Malvern 30 0 SWDP15 Blackmore Park Malvern SWDP16 Three Counties Showground Malvern 0 0 SWDP17 Newlands Malvern Malvern Hills Malvern Due to the small numbers of housing, these small sites will have a minimal impact on the performance of the sewerage network. Sustainable surface water drainage principles should be used to reduce the demand on the public sewerage network. There are a number of connection options for the site. There are known capacity issues in the foul network in the sewer that runs adjacent to the east of the site. If a connection is made to this length of sewer capacity improvements may be required. However, connections to the other sewers surrounding the site (to the north or south west) are not likely to cause a significant deterioration in network performance. These sites are likley to drain in an easterly direction. In order to assess whether the net impact of the development will be significant further investigation will be required to determine the existing discharge rate from the site into the sewers. If the flows leaving the site are minimal then capacity improvements may be required to accommodate the development. There are no known capacity issues downstream of the site and the receiving sewers are on a different part of the system to the QinetiQ site. The impact of the development is therefore likely to be low. The site will drain directly to a pumping station to the south east of the site. The catchment upstream of the pumping station is relatively large and the addition of this employment land is unlikely to cause any significant issues. The use of this site is unknown. It is not anticipated that 'countryside activities' will have a significant impact on sewerage, but this should be revisited once site plans are finalised. There are a number of connection options for this site, some of which will require capacity improvements. It is recommended that the developer enters into early discussions with Severn Trent regarding this site. Capacity improvements are likely to be required and the developer may need to pump flows from the site to the public sewerage network. Potential impact on sewerage infrastructure Low Low / Medium (depending on connection) Medium (subject to further investigations) Low Low Low Medium (subject to further investigations)

87 Appendix B: Individual SWDP site allocation impact on sewerage infrastructure Site Ref Site Name Location No of dwellings Employment land (ha) SWDP13/4 Former playing fields, Green Lane, Malvern Wells Malvern Wells 35 0 SWDP23/14 Land adj to the Crown (West) Martley 39 0 SWDP23/13 Land adj to Crown (South) Martley 12 0 Sewage Treatment Works Catchment MHPW06 Land adjacent Crown Inn Powick 43 0 Powick SWDP24/6 Former allotments, Winsmore Powick 30 0 Powick MHTW14 Land adj the Haven, Oldwood Road Tenbury Wells 40 0 SWDP20/1 Land opposite Morningside, Oakwood Rd Tenbury Wells SWDP7/2 Fire Station/Crown Gate/Angel Place/The Butts Worcester 0 0 SWDP7/2 Fire Station/Crown Gate/Angel Place/The Butts Worcester 0 0 SWDP7/2 Fire Station/Crown Gate/Angel Place/The Butts Worcester 0 0 SWDP6/10 Land at Albert Road Worcester City 20 0 SWDP6/11 Swimming Pool Site, Sansome Walk Worcester City 40 0 SWDP6/12 Claines Recreation Ground and adjacent Land Worcester City 15 0 Martley - Ductons Copp Tenbury Worcester City Council Sewerage Comment There are two foul sewers crossing the site flowing in a south easterly direction. There are no known capacity issues downstream of the site and additional foul flows from 35 houses is unlikely to cause capacity issues. There are no known capacity issues in the foul network in Martley. These developments are unlikely to have an adverse impact on sewerage performance. There are no significant capacity issues in the downstream network. Flows from an additional 39 dwellings will not have a significant impact on sewerage performance. There is a foul sewer crossing the northern part of the site. The site is located in close proximity to the sewage treatment works and there is unlikely to be any deterioration in network performance downstream of the site. There is a combined sewer crossing the site. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream sewerage network. Sustainable surface water management principles should be applied on site to reduce the demand on the public sewerage network. The immediate area appears to be drained by private sewers (which may have now transferred to Severn Trent under the recent change in legislation). There are public sewers in the vicinity and a new sewer could be requisitioned to connect to the public system if there is insufficient capacity in the private network or if a connection to the private network is not possible. This is a Brownfield development and is unlikely to cause a deterioration in network performance. Sustainable surface water management principles should be adopted on site to reduce the demand on the public sewerage network. There are a known capacity issues to the north and east of the site. It is recommended that a connection is made to the south in London Road as it is more likely that there is sufficient capacity in this part of the network and this would avoid delaying development. There are a number of connection options for the development. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream network and given that the site is Brownfield, the net impact on the receiving sewers will be minimal. There are a number of sewers passing through the site. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream network and the site is partly Brownfield, so the net impact on flows will be low. Potential impact on sewerage infrastructure Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low SWDP6/13 Former Ronkswood Hospital Site Worcester City SWDP6/1 Land South of Lyppard Hill Worcester City There are a number of connection options for these adjacent sites. The Lyppard Hill site is likely to gravitate to the south and connect into the network in Darwin Avenue. However there are known sewer flooding issues downstream and localised capacity improvements may be required. An alternative would be for both developers to combine the drainage from both sites to make a single connection into the sewerage network in Newtown Road, opposite the John Antony Centre. This would reduce the need for capacity improvements and mitigate any subsequent delays to development. Low / Medium (subject to connection location) SWDP6/NEWJ Land North Warndon Woods Worcester City 0 5 SWDP6/14 Worcester Woods Worcester City 0 11 SWDP6/NEWI Land South Warndon Woods Worcester City 0 5 SWDP8/5 Worcester Technology Park Worcester City 0 0 SWDP6/16 Church Farm, Claines (cemetery) Worcester City 0 0 SWDP6/16 Church Farm, Claines (P&R) Worcester City 0 0 SWDP8/4 Gwillam's Farm Worcester City SWDP6/18 Midland Road Worcester City 0 1 SWDP6/19 Perdiswell (Leisure uses) Worcester City 0 0 SWDP6/2 Gregory's Bank Worcester City SWDP6/20 School of Art and Design, Barbourne (Care Home) Worcester City 0 0 SWDP6/NEWD Old Brewery Service Station, Barbourne Road Worcester City 6 0 SWDP6/22 Warehouse, Portland Street Worcester City 0 0 SWDP6/21 Former Hallow Road Tip Worcester City 0 0 SWDP6/4 Cedar Avenue / Blackpole Road Worcester City SWDP6/5 Gas Holder SIte Worcester City 40 0 SWDP6/6 Old Northwick Farm Worcester City 40 0 Worcester - Bromwich Road This site may require pumping, subject to local levels. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream sewer network and any required upgrades will be localised. These sites will discharge to the same sewer. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream sewerage network and the development is unlikely to cause a significant deterioration in sewerage performance. Any required capacity improvements are likely to be localised. A new sewer will need to be requisitioned to drain these sites. There are a number of connection options for where the new sewer will connect to and hydraulic modelling should be undertaken to identify the connection with least impact. There are surface water and foul sewers passing through the site. There are some known capacity issues downstream of the site and localised capacity improvements may be required to accommodate additional flows. This should be quantified using hydraulic modelling. Nevertheless the impact is considered to be relatively low. These sites will connect into the same combined sewer. There is a record of minor flooding in the downstream network. However, this occurred during extreme rainfall and it is not anticipated that the proposed development will cause a deterioration in network performance. A large proportion of the sites is brownfield and therefore the net impact on sewerage performance will be low. These small, brownfield sites will have a negligible impact on the sewerage network. There is a known capacity issue downstream of the site on the combined sewer network. There is also a Combined Sewer Overflow downstream of the site. Hydraulic modelling will be required to determine the impact of the development on these locations. Whilst the overall impact of the development is likely to be low, localised capacity improvements may be required to accommodate flows from this site. There is a single record of minor flooding on a combined sewer downstream of this site. This brownfield development is not likely to have a significant impact on sewerage performance as the net increase in flow will be low. However, where possible, the surface water entering the network should be managed sustainably to reduce storm flows entering the sewers. There are no known capacity issues on the downstream foul and surface water sewers. Surface water sewers discharge to a culverted watercourse adjacent to the site, which may need to be considered as part of a flood risk assessment. There is a combined sewer passing through this site. There is a record of minor flooding in the downstream network. An additional 40 dwellings is unlikely to cause a significant deterioration in network performance, given that the site is brownfield and that the net impact on the sewerage system will be low. Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

88 Appendix B: Individual SWDP site allocation impact on sewerage infrastructure Site Ref Site Name Location No of dwellings Employment land (ha) Sewage Treatment Works Catchment Sewerage Comment SWDP6/7 Wyvern Service Station Worcester City 6 0 These small, brownfield sites will have a negligible impact on the sewerage network. Low SWDP6/8 Moor Street Clinic Worcester City 20 0 There are no known capacity issues in the downstream combined sewer network. Given that the developments are brownfield the net impact on the receiving sewer network will be low. Low SWDP6/NEWA West of Grasmere Drive/South of Ullswater Close Worcester City 16 0 There are two connection options for this site. There are known flooding issues in the downstream network to the east of the site. If a connection was to be made to this location, capacity improvements will be required. However, a gravity connection should be feasible to the public sewers to the north in Ullswater Close. A connection to this sewer would Low negate the need for capacity improvements and any subsequent delays. SWDP6/NEWC East of Stanley Road/North of Primary School Worcester City 10 0 There are two records of flooding of properties on the opposite side of Stanley Road. However these occurred during extreme events and Low SWDP6/23 Offerton Lane Gypsy and Travellers Site Worcester City 0 0 These sites are relatively small in locations with no known sewer flooding issues. The impact of these developments is SWDP6/NEWF North and south of Brookthorpe Close Worcester City 7 0 therefore considered to be low. Low SWDP7/4 Shrub Hill Worcester City SWDP6/3 Masonic Hall Site Worcester City 50 0 SWDP6/9 Post Office Sorting Office, Westbury Street Worcester City 20 0 SWDP7/5 Carden Street Worcester City SWDP7/3 Former Co-op building/cornmarket Worcester City 0 0 SWDP7/6 Sidbury Worcester City 0 0 SWDP8/1 Broomhall Community and Norton Barrack Worcester City There are known capacity issues within this subcatchment. Whilst the developments are brownfield, hydraulic modelling should be used to ensure that there is no detriment to the performance of the downstream sewer network. Where possible, surface water should be removed from the network to reduce the demand on the surrounding combined sewer network. Capacity improvements may be required. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream combined sewer network. Given that the developments are brownfield the net impact on the receiving sewer network will be low. There are no known capacity issues in the combined sewers that cross the site. The impact of the development on the performance of the sewerage network is likely to be low as the site is brownfield. However, this should be determined once the final use has been confirmed. Severn Trent Water are in discussions with the landowners regarding this site. The drainage strategy involves the abandonment of a small sewage treatment works (Broomhall STW) and Norton Barracks Pumping Station, incorporating flows from these assets into the on-site sewerage. Flows will be pumped directly to Worcester sewage treatment works. Potential impact on sewerage infrastructure Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling) Low Low High (in discussions with land owner) SWDP8/2 Temple Laughern - Worcester West Worcester City SWDP6/NEWB A44 Service Station/Bromyard Road Worcester City 10 0 SWDP6/17 Grove Farm, Bromyard Road Worcester City 0 11 SWDP6/NEWE West of Dudley Close Worcester City 8 0 SWDP8/3 Land to the rear of Kilbury Drive Worcester City SWDP6/15 Government Offices Worcester City SWDP6/NEWH Land at Nunnery Way Worcester City 0 0 WO93 Henwick Road/Chequers Lane Worcester City N17 Land to the North of Boat Lane Evesham N21 Land East of Offenham Road Evesham 0 0 Adj 37-N03 Land behind Lichfield Avenue Evesham 0 0 Wychavon Evesham Works SWDP*A Throckmorton Airfield Throckmorton 0 0 TBC 2012SC Stonebridge Cross Droitwich Spa 0 10 Droitwich - Ladywood SWDP12/3 Vale Park (Phase 3) Evesham 0 10 Evesham Works SWDP12/3 Vale Park (Phase 3) Evesham 0 10 SWDP25/6 Adjacent to Defford First School, off Church Lane Defford 5 0 Defford SWDP24/21 Land R/O Green End Pinvin 5 0 Pershore SWDP24/25 Land adjacent to Bridge Inn, Foredraught Lane Tibberton 5 0 Sale Green SWDP24/7 Land along Station Road opposite properties from Evenlode to Lindencroft Ashton Under Hill 6 0 Ashton Under Hill Land west of Main Street Bishampton 6 0 Bishampton Land off Blacksmiths Lane Cropthorne 6 0 Cropthorne Heath Land east of Upper Street Defford 6 0 Defford SWDP9/4 Oakham Place Droitwich Spa 6 0 Droitwich - Ladywood Land to the rear of Ashfurlong, Main Street Pinvin 6 0 Pershore Land adjacent to "The Lanterns" South Littleton 6 0 Blackminster SWDP24/10 Land at Field Barn Lane Cropthorne 7 0 Cropthorne Heath There is a large amount of development proposed in this area of Worcester. A number of connections to the public sewer network are likely to be required. There are some records of flooding in the downstream network and capacity improvements are likely to be required to accommodate the cumulative impacts of these developments (subject to hydraulic modelling) These sites will drain to the same sub-catchment. There is known flooding problems in the sub-catchment. The Government Offices site is a brownfield development and the net impact on the sewerage network will be low. However, the impact of all of these developments should be quantified using hydraulic modelling. There are no known capacity issues in the downstream combined sewer. There is a minor flooding incident and a combined sewer overflow downstream of the site. Hydraulic modelling should be undertaken to quantify the impact on these locations. Sustainable surface water management should be used to reduce demand on the public sewerage network. The impact of this development on the receiving sewerage network should be confirmed once the final site use has been confirmed. This site is not currently served by a public sewerage network. Once the land use for the plans have been confirmed a drainage strategy should be developed in consultation with Severn Trent Water. The nearby sewage treatment works (Tilesford Park / Throckmorton) are not likely to have sufficient capacity for this site and therefore early consultation with Severn Trent Water is required to determine the most suitable, least cost drainage strategy. This area appears to be drained by private drainage systems. These may have transferred to Severn Trent ownership in the recent change in legislation. However the capacity of the receiving system is unknown. Further investigations may be required. It is anticipated that the drainage for earlier phases of Vale Park was constructed to accommodate flows from later phases. In which case there should be sufficient capacity for these developments. The developer should confirm this. High (subject to hydraulic modelling) Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling) Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling) TBC Medium Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling) Low

89 Appendix B: Individual SWDP site allocation impact on sewerage infrastructure Site Ref Site Name Location No of dwellings Employment land (ha) Sewage Treatment Works Catchment SWDP24/17 Land off Broadway Lane, adjacent to Grey Lyn. Fladbury 7 0 Cropthorne Heath SWDP25/11 Land adjacent to Blakes Hill North & Middle Littleton 8 0 Blackminster Land off Winchcombe Road Sedgeberrow 8 0 Sedgeberrow SWDP25/9 Land at Park Farm, Jobs Lane Kemerton 9 0 Bredon Land opposite the Village Hall & tennis courts Beckford 10 0 Beckford Land at Conderton Close & Woodbine Cottage Conderton 10 0 Bredon SWDP24/11 Site behind Hawthorne Close, off Stonebow Road Drakes Broughton 10 0 Pershore SWDP9/3 Boxing Club Droitwich Spa 10 0 Droitwich - Ladywood SWDP25/10 Land South of Blacksmith Lane Lower Moor 10 0 Lower Moor Land adjacent to Honeybourne Road Pebworth 10 0 Pebworth SWDP18/3 Garage Court, St Andrews Rd Pershore 10 0 Pershore SWDP18/7 Land adj. Conningsby Drive Pershore 10 0 Pershore Elmley Road Ashton Under Hill 12 0 Ashton Under Hill SWDP23/22 Land to the east of Kingsdale Road Broadway 12 0 Broadway Land to the rear of Cleeve Prior First School Cleeve Prior 12 0 Bidford on Avon SWDP24/18 Land to east of Boot Inn on Radford Road Flyford Flavell 12 0 Flyford Flavell Land behind Main Street, behind Sedgeberrow 12 0 Sedgeberrow SWDP18/4 Garage Court, Abbots Road Pershore 13 0 Pershore SWDP23/33 Land South of The Racks Ombersley 14 0 Ombersley SWDP24/22 Land adjoining North Terrace & Uplands Pinvin 14 0 Pershore SWDP23/20 Land to the South of Bibsworth House, Leamington Road Broadway 15 0 Broadway SWDP24/19 Land adjacent to Crest Hill, Harvington 15 0 Harvington SWDP24/26 Land rear of Hawthorn Rise Tibberton 15 0 Sale Green Derelect Garage Site on Worcester Road Upton Snodsbury 16 0 Upton Snodsbury SWDP24/27 Land between College Road and School Lane Upton Snodsbury 16 0 Upton Snodsbury SWDP23/32 Land off Leasowes Road Offenham 19 0 LP1 Ivy Lane Bretforton 20 0 Blackminster SWDP24/9 Littlebrook Nurseries Bretforton 20 0 Sewerage Comment Due to the small numbers of housing proposed, these small sites will have a minimal impact on the performance of the sewerage network. Sustainable surface water drainage principles should be used to reduce the demand on the public sewerage network. SWDP9/5 Acre Lane Droitwich Spa 20 0 Droitwich - Ladywood SWDP24/14 Land to north of Russell Drive off Pershore Road Eckington 20 0 Eckington SWDP18/1 Garage, High Street Pershore 20 0 Pershore SWDP18/2 Health Centre, Lower Priest Lane Pershore 20 0 Pershore SWDP24/23 Land north of Green End and Owls Reach Pinvin 20 0 Pershore SWDP24/24 Land off Station Road & Long Hyde Road South Littleton 20 0 Blackminster SWDP18/6 Land rear of the High Street Pershore 22 0 Pershore SWDP23/19 Land rear of Oak Lane Bredon 24 0 Bredon SWDP9/6 Willow Court, Westwood Road Droitwich Spa 24 0 Droitwich - Ladywood SWDP25/4 Land opposite Village Hall off Church Road Crowle 25 0 Crowle - Worcester SWDP23/27 Land behind the High Street Honeybourne 25 0 Honeybourne SWDP23/34 Land north of Woodhall Lane Ombersley 25 0 Ombersley SWDP25/8 Harrow Lane to north Himbleton 6 0 N/A This area is not served by public sewerage N/A SWDP23/18 Land off Banks Road Badsey 30 0 Blackminster There are no known capacity issues downstream of the site and so the impact of the development is likely to be low. Low Potential impact on sewerage infrastructure Low SWDP23/30 Land off Main Street Offenham 30 0 SWDP23/31 Land south of Gibbs Lane Offenham Land off Three Cocks Lane Offenham 0 0 Blackminster The flows from these sites will pass through a number of pumping stations to the west of the village. Whilst there are no significant capacity issues in the downstream sewerage network, the impact on the operation of the pumping stations should be checked using hydraulic modelling. Any capacity improvements that are required to accommodate the cumulative flows are likely to be localised. Low SWDP11/3 Land off Cheltenham Road Evesham 36 0 Evesham Works SWDP24/13 Land east of Stonebow Road adjacent to railway line Drakes Broughton Jul Site to south of Drakes Broughton along B4084 Drakes Broughton 47 0 As the site is brownfield the net impact on the receiving sewerage network will be minimal. Sustainable surface water management principles should be adopted on site to reduce the demand on the sewerage network. SWDP24/8 Land north of Station Rd Bretforton 48 0 Blackminster There are no known capacity issues downstream of the site and so the impact of the development is likely to be low. Low SWDP23/23 Land west of Leamington Road Broadway 59 0 SWDP23/24 Land adjacent to Station Road Broadway wy-02 Land off Crown Lane Wychbold 60 0 SWDP23/35 Land off Worcester Road Wychbold 60 0 Broadway Wychbold SWDP23/26 Land between High Street and Weston Road Honeybourne 75 0 Honeybourne 17/10/2014 Land at Averill Close Broadway 80 0 Broadway Pershore All foul drainage in Drakes Broughton drains to a pumping station on Lewis Road. The cumulative effects of these developments should be identified using hydraulic modelling to ensure that the additional flows do not cause the There are known capacity issues in parts of Broadway. However the proposed developments are not upstream of capacity constraints. The developments are likely to have a minimal impact on network performance and any capacity improvements are likely to be localised. This site is located in close proximity to Wychbold sewage treatment works and there are no known capacity issues in the downstream network. The impact of the development is therefore likely to be low. A Sewer Capacity Assessment has been undertaken for this site on behalf of a developer. Based on hydraulic modelling it is not anticipated that the development will have a detrimental impact on the performance of the receiving sewerage network. A foul connection could be made to the east or west of the site. If a connection is made to the west there is a known capacity issue downstream of the site and capacity improvements may be required. The sewers to the east are smaller and hydraulic modelling should be used to confirm capacity. Low Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling) Low Low Low Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling)

90 Appendix B: Individual SWDP site allocation impact on sewerage infrastructure Site Ref Site Name Location No of dwellings Employment land (ha) Sewage Treatment Works Catchment Sewerage Comment Potential impact on sewerage infrastructure SWDP9/7 Canal Basin Project Droitwich Spa 80 0 SWDP9/1 Vines Lane Droitwich Spa SWDP9/2 Land east of Salwarpe Road, between canal & river Salwarpe Droitwich Spa Droitwich - Ladywood A large proportion of these sites are brownfield and currently drain to the public sewerage network. The net impact on the receiving sewerage network is likely to be low and there are no known capacity issues in the downstream sewerage network. The foul flows from these developments are therefore likely to be low and any capacity improvements will be localised. Low SWDP11/4 Employment Site, top of Kings Road Evesham Evesham Works SWDP23/25 Land west of Worcester Road Hartlebury Kidderminster Oldington SWDP23/29 Land East of Withybed Lane Inkberrow Inkberrow 37-N16 Land to the West of Abbey Road, South of Boat Lane Evesham Evesham Works SWDP24/16 Dilmore Lane / Station Road Fernhill Heath Droitwich - Ladywood SWDP12/1 Cheltenham Road (Phase2) Evesham Evesham Works SWDP VPx Vale Park extension Evesham 0 10 SWDP11/1 Land at bottom of Peewit Road, Hampton. Evesham 63 0 Evesham Works SWDP12/2 South of Pershore Road, Hampton. Evesham Evesham Works SWDP19/1 Station Road/Wyre Road, Pershore (a) Pershore 0 0 SWDP19/1 Station Road/Wyre Road, Pershore (b) Pershore SWDP19/1 Station Road/Wyre Road, Pershore (c) Pershore 0 0 Pershore The foul flows from this development will drain to a small pumping station to the south west of the site. Although the site is brownfield, some localised capacity improvements may be required at the SPS to ensure that the overflow does not operate more frequently as a result of the development. Nevertheless, improvements are likely to be small scale. There are foul and surface water sewers crossing the site. There are no known capacity issues downstream of the site and therefore the impact of development is likely to be low. Flows from the site will drain to a pumping station on Withybed Lane. Flows are then pumped back up into the village past a location of known capacity issues. The impact of this development on the pumping station operation and flooding should be determined using hydraulic modelling. There is a large 625mm diameter combined sewer passing through the site, which drains to a sewage pumping station near to the Leisure Centre. There are no records of flooding, though the impact of an additional 200 dwellings (plus the proposed development of land to the north of Boat Lane) may require some capacity improvements to ensure that the overflow at the pumping station does not operate more frequently. However improvements will be localised. Where possible surface water should outfall to the adjacent watercourse. Flows from Fernhill Heath will drain to a terminal pumping station that pumps flows to Droitwich Ladywood STW. This pumping station does not have sufficient capacity to accept additional flows from this development and capacity improvements will be required. Hydraulic modelling should be used to inform the extent of the upgrades. The impact of the development is medium to high. The Cheltenham Road site is likely to connect into the sewers in Cheltenham Road. The employment site has a number of connection options. If the development also connects into the subcatchment that drains through Cheltenham Road, capacity improvements may be required. However there are a number of options for connecting flows from this site and early consultation with Severn Trent is advisable. These sites fall within the same subcatchment. The sites may have to be pumped to the public sewerage network. If possible, the developers of these sites should work together to develop a drainage strategy that takes account of both These sites fall within the same subcatchment and will drain to a pumping station adjacent to Wyre Road. The cumulative impacts of all development in this area should be quantified using hydraulic modelling as capacity improvements may be required. This should be undertaken once the land use for sites a and c have been confirmed. Low Low Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling) Low Medium Medium (depending on connection location) Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling) Medium (subject to hydraulic modelling)

91 C Severn Trent Water statement 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc VII

92 This page is intentionally left blank 2012s5947 S Worcestershire 2012 Water Cycle Study Update Final Report v1.0.doc VIII

93 Hucknall Road Nottingham NG3 5SG Mr Paul Baylis SWDP Planning Manager Wychavon District Council Civic Centre Queen Elizabeth Drive Pershore Worcs. WR10 1PT Tel April 2013 Dear Mr Baylis, South Worcester Development Plan Water Cycle Study In response to the concerns raised by the Environment Agency s regarding the available sewage treatment capacity to meet growth as identified in the South Worcester Development Plan I would like to comment as follows:- During the course of our discussions to progress the SWDP an assessment has been carried out to identify the issues with treatment capacity to meet future development. In areas where sufficient capacity is not currently available we will complete necessary improvements to provide the capacity once we have sufficient confidence the development will go ahead. We are obligated to do this. We will ensure that our assets have no adverse effect on the environment and as a matter of course we will liaise closely with the EA to ensure we provide appropriate levels of treatment at each of our sewage treatment works. Alongside the requirement to provide additional capacity there is our requirement to manage our assets effectively to minimise our customers bills. Consequently there may be cases where we wait until we have further certainty that development will proceed before investing in additional capacity. This is to avoid making investment on the basis of speculative development that does not go ahead. We take seriously the concerns of the EA and although we accept that there may currently be minimal further treatment capacity we would expect that by working closely with the

94 SWDP and the EA that the delivery plan can be put in place to resolve this prior to any development being occupied. Where appropriate we will seek planning condition to enforce this. Should you need further clarification regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours faithfully, Peter Davies Commercial Development Advisor Severn Trent Water

95 Offices at Atherstone Doncaster Edinburgh Haywards Heath Limerick Newcastle upon Tyne Newport Saltaire Skipton Tadcaster Thirsk Wallingford Warrington Registered Office South Barn Broughton Hall SKIPTON North Yorkshire BD23 3AE t:+44(0) Jeremy Benn Associates Ltd Registered in England Visit our website