Been swimming in Langstone Harbour recently?

I suggest that part of the planning permission and funding of the considerable infrastructures i.e. sewage/adequate proper drainage- even if separate from existing- should be borne by those developers that want to build 1000's of new houses without any consideration for this by the Local Planners being given . No doubt it sounds simplistic but surely they too are making millions
from these developments. The development of the Welborne area is a case in point .

ianat182
A mate of mine tells me that for a small housing development, it can already be cheaper to deal with your own sewage than to connect to mains drainage.
Of course that's only going to work where there is a bit of space.
 
A mate of mine tells me that for a small housing development, it can already be cheaper to deal with your own sewage than to connect to mains drainage.
Of course that's only going to work where there is a bit of space.

I don't know about cheaper but there are several new estates around Chi where sewrage is managed on site - there is some local treatment but *I think* ultimately lorries carry the stuff away.

An estate 100m from my front door was earmarked for that solution. At the last minute Apuldrum Sewerage Works (discharging into the Fishbourne Channel, Chi Hbr) changed their treatment method and increased capacity just enough to handle output from the estate. Instead of a reed bed they now have a pond.

Several places on the Manhood Peninsular adjacent to Chi Harbour regularly have sewerage bubbling up drain covers and backing up into peoples domestic toilets. And they're *still* building more houses - it's a catastrophy.
 
Is it the Environment Agency that is responsible for the Blue Flag schemes for bathing beaches? Surely just a token thing , if at all, this last year when the Water companies given the OK to dump untreated sewage at say, Hillhead , and the Devon ones that began this thread.

.
 
Last chance to write to your MP and say you think he should go with the Duke of Westminster's version rather than the watered down version the government is proposing. DoWs version says Water cos must reduce untreated effluent, government version is just mitigate which could simply involve dumping chemicals in it or simply a longer outfall pipe.
 
Last chance to write to your MP and say you think he should go with the Duke of Westminster's version rather than the watered down version the government is proposing. DoWs version says Water cos must reduce untreated effluent, government version is just mitigate which could simply involve dumping chemicals in it or simply a longer outfall pipe.
yup, the debate is on Monday. Get those emails in...
 
Top