'This is an area of serious water stress': Tighter water standards plea for future Telford housing developments

Housebuilders have their doubts about stricter standards, with one representative warning at a meeting that the public is not yet ready to have a ‘bath rather than a power shower'.

Telford & Wrekin Council has agreed to propose changing water efficiency standards in its local plan from 110 litres per person per day to 100 litres per person per day, which could mean homes including water efficiency measures like baths rather than power showers. Its officials say this is supported by evidence.

Government planning inspector Catherine Carpenter was told the borough is considered an “area of serious water stress”.

The meeting was also told that climate change is leading to periods of drought and then flooding.

Rachel Danemann, of the Home Builders Federation, told hearings on Tuesday (March 17) that 100 litres per person is a “random target” set by the council “because it feels like it".

She warned of the costs being imposed by a patchwork of different standards across the country.

“In the Cambridge-Oxford arc, there is a problem, but that is not the case in Telford,” she said.

She added that “consumer behaviour change is needed” because there are cases of water efficiency measures like baths being taken out of homes where occupants prefer a power shower.

But Kate Mayne, of the Strine Internal Drainage Board, which represents farmers, insisted: “It really is an issue. We have got to start delivering with this.”

Muxton parish and borough councillor Nigel Dugmore (Conservative) queried: “We are in a water-stressed area but we are building thousands of houses.”

He asked what would happen if people who need more than 100 litres of water each day used above that quantity.

But Gavin Ashford, council strategic planning manager, said: “Water supply is not cut off if residents use more. Houses are being built in the Cambridge area. It does not prevent development coming forward.”

Resident Kevan Hendy warned of ‘water rationing’.

“This is a serious issue for the borough yet you are proposing to build more housing than we are mandated by Government,” he said.

Council barrister Freddie Humphreys, of King Chambers, told planning inspectors that the proposed change is “informed by evidence".

Inspectors Mike Worden and Catherine Carpenter will consider what they have heard following conclusion of the hearings this week. They have anticipated publishing their findings in the autumn.

Background papers show that the Environment Agency (EA) agreed an amendment to change the policy from 110 per person per day to 100.

“Our statement of common ground provides detail on the evidence, reasoning and justification for this,” a statement read.

An EA planning specialist wrote that other local plans are responding to this and the Government is being advised to apply tighter standards.

The Strine Internal Drainage Board is advising an “integrated approach to addressing both water scarcity and flood risk” which it says is “considered essential to enabling development in northern Telford".

The board’s background papers said it is “of the view that the provision of significant strategic drainage infrastructure will be necessary in order to secure sustainable and viable development".

It added that one of the solutions currently under consideration by the board is the provision of balancing pool on the Crow Brook.

“The Crow Brook site offers the potential to deliver a multi-functional green infrastructure asset capable of attenuating and improving the quality of urban surface water runoff and highway drainage through the integration of a constructed wetland design.

“The proposed approach could contribute positively to the delivery of Biodiversity Net Gain through the creation and enhancement of priority habitats, ecological connectivity, and help address low flow issues in the Strine.

“In addition, the site could provide accessible green space, supporting wider green infrastructure objectives, and contributing to the effectiveness of policies.”