A number of additional questions were raised in respect of the following areas:
· The focus of the sixth measure that had been due to be completed in February 2017 for which written confirmation remained to be received.
· The extent to which it was realistic to expect completion of the three measures that needed to be addressed by the end of August 2017.
· The option for the Environment Agency to request a programme of delivery prior to the end of August, and the potential for the information in this programme to enable Officers to determine whether implementation remained on track.
· The need for planning permission to be secured in relation to some of these measures.
· The length of time required to process a major planning application. RB advised that a major planning application could take 13 to 16 weeks to process and this includes three weeks for consultation.
· The extent to which it was realistic to expect that planning permission could be provided to enable the landowner to complete some of the outstanding measures by the end of August 2017.
· The need for residents to report any concerns about developments for which no applications had been submitted.
· The responsibility of the landowner to determine how best to complete the three outstanding measures, as detailed in the Reservoir Safety Enforcement Notice.
· The need for the landowner to have a Waste Recovery Permit to bring materials on site, which had been granted.
· The extent to which a plan was available in respect of levels of top soil and, if so, whether this could be shared with the public. TD undertook to check this on behalf of the Working Party.
· The quantity of materials permitted on site under the permit and the extent to which road haul was taken into account.
· The monitoring arrangements in place to ensure compliance with the terms of the permit.
· The role and responsibilities of the engineer on the site.
· The extent to which WRS were satisfied with the monitoring arrangements that were in place.
· The role and powers of the Environment Agency. TD explained that action could not be taken until the deadlines had passed for the outstanding measures.
· The potential for the Environment Agency to start planning at an earlier date how to respond in the event that the measures were not completed by the deadline.
· The Section 15 powers available to the Environment Agency under the Reservoir Act, which could be used to undertake the works if these were not completed by the deadline.
· The need for the Environment Agency to work closely with BDC and to abide by the planning process if it had to intervene at a later date.
· The Section 16 emergency powers available to the Environment Agency under the Reservoir Act, whereby engineers could be appointed to review any emergency issues associated with a reservoir.
· The financial implications of the Environment Agency’s use of Section 15 and Section 16 powers together with the potential to recharge the landowner for any works undertaken using those powers.
· The requirement for the Environment Agency to only undertake necessary works using these powers.
· The length of time since the last meeting of the Marlbrook Tip Working Party and the need to hold meetings in a timely manner.
· The potential for the Environment Agency to notify attendees when confirmation had been received that the sixth measure due in February had been completed. TD confirmed that confirmation would be provided and it was agreed that, if this information was sent to the council, information could also be published on the Marlbrook Tip pages of the Council’s website.
· The additional equipment that had been observed on the site in recent months by local residents and the purpose of this equipment.
· The potential for any planning applications to be considered by the Council’s Planning Committee and the process that this would follow.
· The need for the planning process to proceed in line with legislative requirements and for Members of the Planning Committee to remain impartial.
· The potential for any applicants to appeal a decision taken by the Planning Committee and the role of a Planning Inspector in hearing any such appeal.
· The potential to discontinue the reservoir and the process involved in doing so. TD advised that this could be a financially costly and lengthy process.