| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Brentford Waterways | |
| Posted by: | Nigel Moore | |
| Date/Time: | 20/01/10 21:44:00 |
| Jim, there were several objections to the current proposal by the EA which were subsequently addressed by the proposers to the EA’s satisfaction – and as you indicate, those related to flood defence and pollution issues in addition to ecological issues. So as the scheme now stands, the EA have no objections. Apparently I didn't make it clear enough that the current proposal does NOT include residential moorings. The original application of some years back DID propose fully residential moorings, and it was the EA who refused to countenance that on the grounds that no more encroachment of the foreshore for ‘land-based’ uses was acceptable. The issue is an environmental one so falls within their remit, as explained in their Policy Number 222_06 “Encroachment Policy for Tidal Rivers and Estuaries” - “Confronted with a scenario of climate change and increased sea levels, if the process of encroachment continues unchecked river levels will continue to rise and the foreshore will be lost. Most development in, over, under or beside tidal rivers and estuaries will require planning permission from the Local Authority and flood defence consent from the Environment Agency. The Environment Agency is consulted on riverside planning applications by Local Planning Authorities and can recommend approval or refusal of applications or request planning conditions and legal agreements to be attached to any planning permissions granted. Flood defence consents are determined by the Environment Agency for any works in, over or under the tidal river and within the byelaw margin of the tidal flood defences. In determining flood defence consents and providing advice in relation to planning applications the Agency is required to take into account land drainage, flood defence, conservation, archaeology, recreation, landscape, navigation and other environmental matters. It must also consider the costs and benefits involved in its decisions.” As DLG Architects [for Hither Green] wrote to me back in December 2007: “HGD would prefer there to be residential moorings here, but they recognise the EA’s non encroachment policy and perhaps more importantly the residents strong opposition against residential mooring (which has also coloured the Planning departments view on residential moorings at this location).” |