Representation by Affinity Water Limited (Affinity Water Limited)
- Date submitted
- 23 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Other statutory consultees
This relevant representation is submitted on behalf of Affinity Water Limited (“AW”). AW is the largest water-only supplier in the UK and the appointed water undertaker under the Water Industry Act 1991 for certain areas in the south-east of England comprising Bedfordshire, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Surrey, the London Boroughs of Harrow and Hillingdon and parts of the London Boroughs of Barnet, Brent, Ealing and Enfield. AW also supplies water to the Tendring peninsula in Essex and the Folkestone and Dover areas of Kent. As a result, AW is subject to a number of strict statutory duties for the supply of c. 950 million litres of water each day to a population of more than 3.83 million people. AW is therefore a statutory undertaker for the purposes of sections 127 and 138 of the Planning Act 2008. Should the proposed Development Consent Order (“the DCO”) be made to authorise London Luton Airport Limited (“Luton Rising”) to construct, operate and maintain the London Luton Airport Expansion project (“the Scheme”), it would permit extensive development within the Order limits in areas where AW is responsible for providing water supply services. To fulfil its statutory duties, AW maintains a wide range of apparatus that is critical to the continuing efficacy of its services. If made, the DCO would authorise the exercise of powers over or near land in which AW maintains assets and/or has other rights for the purposes of discharging its statutory duties. Unchecked, the exercise of such powers in respect of AW’s interests would cause severe detriment to it. AW notes the ‘standard’ set of protective provisions for the benefit of statutory undertakers contained in Part 1 of Schedule 8 to the draft DCO [AS-005]. However, AW considers these to fall short of providing it with the necessary protections. No detailed engagement between AW and Luton Rising has taken place on these to date (albeit it is acknowledged that Luton Rising has engaged with AW on wider matters during the pre-application and pre-examination stages) – such engagement is encouraged by AW. Subject to such engagement commencing in a positive manner in short order, AW sees no impediment at this stage to it being able to reach a satisfactory arrangement with Luton Rising during the course of the examination. However, absent such an arrangement having been formalised, AW is obliged at this stage to formally object to the DCO application on the basis of the Scheme causing serious detriment to AW’s apparatus and operations. In addition to the protective provisions, on a preliminary review of the DCO application documents, AW has identified various areas of concern on which it seeks further engagement with Luton Rising. This includes (but is not limited to) (a) the proposed exercise of certain DCO powers that could impact AW’s interests; (b) further information being required on the potential impacts to AW’s water sources and proposed mitigation measures (and how those are to be secured); (c) AW’s role in relation to relevant construction control measures (for example, in relation to management plans to be produced under the code of construction practice); and (d) the treatment of water-related matters during the operation of the Scheme, given these do not appear to be covered in Parts 3 and 4 of Schedule 2 to the DCO. As a final point, the Examining Authority should note that AW is in discussions with Luton Rising in respect of submitting a Statement of Common Ground in due course. Having regard to the Examining Authority’s procedural decisions to date, AW does not propose at this stage to submit a Principal Areas of Disagreement Summary Statement (“PADSS”). However, AW would be very happy to submit a PADSS in due course, if the Examining Authority would consider it beneficial.