Living with water - Construction Industry Council

Transcription

All Party Group for Excellence in the Built Environment
HOUSE OF COMMONS
LONDON SW1A 0AA
Living
with water
Report from the Commission of Inquiry
into flood resilience of the future
March 2015
Living with water
Report from the Commission of Inquiry into flood
flood resilience of the future
Contents
382
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank the witnesses who gave oral evidence and the
organisations that provided written submissions to the Inquiry, as well as
those that took seats on the panel.
4 Chairman’s foreword
5 Executive summary and recommendations
9
Section 1:
The Inquiry
• 1.1 About the Inquiry
• 1.2 Members of the Commission
• 1.3 Secretariat
10Section 2:
Context and challenges
• 2.1 Scale of the problem
• 2.2 Sources of flooding
• 2.3 Recent improvements and changes by Government
• 2.4 The complicated governance of water management
17 Section 3:
Opportunities and barriers to increasing flood resilience • 3.1 Government spending on flood mitigation measures
• 3.2 Flooding and planning
• 3.3 Surface water, SuDs and Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water
Management Act
• 3.4 Retrofitting SuDS
• 3.5 Lack of coherent technical standards
• 3.6 Flood mapping and better data
• 3.7 Insurance issues
32 Section 4:
Concluding remarks and recommendations
36List of witnesses who gave oral evidence
37 List of all written submissions
This report may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium without specific
permission, providing that it is not reproduced for profit, material or financial gain. It
must be reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. If republishing the
report or referring it to others, its source and date of publication must be acknowledged.
3 39
Living with water
List of witnesses
Chairman’s
who gave oral evidence
foreword
An increasing need for more houses, more dramatic
Stuart Ryder
Paul Shaffer
storms
and
fl
oods,
as
well
as
a
signifi
cant
changes to our
Landscape Institute
CIRIA
environment, are having a significant impact on local
Robert Barker and peoples’ everyday lives.
David Schofield
communities
36
4
RIBA
Hydro Consultancy
Each
these seasonal “acts of god” are
increasingly
David year
Edwards
Espen
Østbye-Strøm
Shropshire
County
Council
Justin
Meredith
dominating our television screens and are having a sigFloodline Developments
Oliver Colvile MP nificant impact on local economies.
Chairman of the
All Party
Parliamentary Group
for Excellence in the
Built Environment
Simon Watkins
Julian Jones (Water 21)
Brian Rodgers
Probably
theCharlesworth
most dramatic pictures over
the last
fifteen
Professor Sue
Andrew
Wescott
(Centre
for
Agroecology
Institution
of
Civil Engineers
years were last year’s scenes of the railway line at DawlWater and Resilience Coventry University)
ish, the flooding on the Somerset Levels and Tewkesbury
Watkins Design Associates
Dr David Kelly
in 2007 and 2012 as well as the torrent of
water that
Professor
Dorte-Rich Jorgensen
Bronwyn
Buntine
Royal
Academy
of Engineering’s Centre of
decimated Boscastle in 2004.
Max Tant
Excellence in Sustainable Building Design at
Kent County Council
Herriot Watt University
Last autumn, the All Party Parliamentary Group for the
Built
Environment – of which I am the Chairman
– conWill McBain
Philip Wilbourn
Dr
Faye
Beaman
Alan
Cripps
ducted a public inquiry, with three public sessions, into
Arup
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
delivering
future flood resilience.
Stephen Garvin
Building
Research taking
Establishment
This
included
evidence from the industry, various
Government agencies, local authorities and the development industry. Disappointingly the Environment Agency
failed to appear before us or failed to provide us with any
written evidence.
This report seeks to set out the challenges facing local
communities, calls on both national and local government to demonstrate a greater sense of leadership and
recommends a strategy which can help provide some
practical answers to these challenges.
Report from the Commission of Inquiry into flood resilience of the future
Executive
List of all written
summary
submissions
This
Arup report is the result of an open Inquiry
into flood mitigation and future resilience.
As
such,plc
all appropriate organisations
Augean
dealing with these issues were invited to
submit
and oral supplementation
Buildingevidence,
Research Establishment
was requested from a number of them. The
weight
CIRIA of evidence we received focussed on
the need for long-term water management
and
the means
of providing a sustainable
Floodline
Developments
and affordable approach for dealing with
the
impacts
of climate change – in essence
Hydro
Consultancy
‘Living with water’. That focus was perhaps
unsurprising,
given
the timing and backdrop
Institution of Civil
Engineers
to the Inquiry. Evidence was taken at a
time
when the
Government approach
Kent County
Council
to the adoption of Sustainable Drainage
Systems
was subject
to Control
uncertainty, creating
Local Authority
Building
widespread concern amongst professionals
in
the builtInstitute
environment. This has meant
Landscape
that in the restricted time we have had
available,
given the looming election, our
F P McCann
scrutiny of the approaches to do specifically
with
Robertcoastal
Mann and ground water flooding and
defence, has been limited in scope. However,
we
this Inquiry
very much as the start
Thesee
Prince’s
Foundation
of the conversation on flood resilience and
mitigation
withofaEngineering
future Government.
Royal Academy
Centre of
Excellence in Sustainable Building design at
Our
report says:
Heriot-Watt
University
● Despite the ever increasing challenges,
flood
resilience
and water
management
Royal
Institute
of British
Architects
still remains a Cinderella issue at
theInstitution
highest political
level, Surveyors
though its
Royal
of Chartered
importance is no less than that of
transport
and power infrastructure and
Shropshire
Council
needs to be given the same priority as
High Design
Speed 2.
Failure to take the issue of
Watkins
Associates
comprehensive water management much
more seriously will have severe economic
impacts on UK plc.
● All of our critical national infrastructure,
including water supply and our drainage
network, is under threat from climate
change which poses both societal and
economic disruption.
● Flooding is not a singular or isolated
event. It affects many aspects of society
and it carries economic risks that will
●
●
●
●
●
●
increase as climate change marches on. As
the associated risks to business increases
under a minimalistic national plan, then
the threat of them locating outside the
UK becomes more likely.
There appears to be no Government
leadership, and no one single department
or minister has overall responsibility for a
strategy and vision for water management
as a whole or for flooding across all of the
domains in which it occurs.
As a consequence we are missing an
opportunity to put in place a sustainable
long-term strategy for water management.
The strategy must protect homes against
the increased flooding we are likely to see
in the wake of climate change and greater
urbanisation, while at the same time
protecting against increased water scarcity
caused by drought.
Flood risk is set to increase – the
Environment Agency says 5.2 million
properties are at risk of flooding, which is
nearly one in six. Of these, 3.8 million are
at risk from surface water flooding, which
can be the most difficult to deal with.
If we are to tackle this increasing problem
we need a fundamental change in how
we view flood management, from the
current position of being all about flood
defence to one of resilience, which means
making space for water and getting ‘morefrom-less’ by seeing all forms of water as
providing multiple benefits.
Professionals must play their part, too,
in greater collaboration and knowledge
sharing, to aid improved communication
and integrated water management, so as
to create and support multifunctional,
multi-beneficial and sustainable places.
If we are to properly prepare for what
climate change throws at us, we need an
honest, open debate and engagement with
the public, both to educate households
and communities in how they can build
water resilience into their properties,
but also to agree what level of water
exceedance is acceptable.
5
37
Living with water
34
6
level,
whereas
its importance
no less
than
●
Climate
change
means thatis
surface
water
thatwill
of transport
andcommonplace
power infrastructure.
become more
in future
That
said,need
water
emotivecarefully
subject to
and will
tois
bean
managed
because
the misery
And
avoidof
having
to keepflooding
buildingcauses.
new drainage
we capacity
have theat
spectre
at unaffordable
times of management
vast and
expense.
on the
hoof,the
with
money
going
those
Instead,
public
should
be to
encouraged
communities
shout
thepuddles’
loudestor
– as
and in
to see suchthat
events
as ‘big
theharmless
case of the
Somerset
with money
water
flowingLevels,
along gutters
and
being
spent
on‘exceedance
media-driven
mitigation
kerbs.
This
drainage’
should
measures
like dredging
which experts
be recognised
as an acceptable
way oftold
us can
do more
harm
good inproviding
the long
managing
water
onthan
the surface,
term.
it is done in such a way as to avoid
Ifunacceptable
we are to properly
prepare for what
problems.
climate
change throws
at defences
us, we need
●
The financing
of flood
andmore of
an honest,
open
and engagement
with
resilience
is a debate
very significant
challenge.
theFunding
public, both
to educate
households
and
for capital
projects
and
communities
into
they
canhard
build
maintenance
of how
assets,
both
andwater
soft is
resilience
theiranproperties,
also to
likely tointo
remain
issue in thebut
foreseeable
further
understanding
discussion
ofin
future.
Annual floodand
damage
costs are
what
of water
is acceptable,
thelevel
region
of £1.1exceedance
billion and could
rise by
in areas
suchasas
roads.
as much
£27
billion by 2080 according
Professionals
must play
theirItpart
to the Environment
Agency.
has too
been
in greater
collaboration
and knowledge
estimated
that maintaining
existing levels
sharing
to aid
improved
of flood
defence
wouldcommunication
require flood and
integrated
management
and
defencewater
spending
to increasetotocreate
over £1
support
billionmultifunctional,
a year by 2035. multi-beneficial
andW
sustainable
places. in the UK is
●
ater management
complicated by the fact we have what has
Recommendations
been described as ‘the most disconnected
Wewater
wouldmanagement
urge an incoming
Government
to.
system
in the world’
consider
the following
proposals
it continues
Too many
organisations
haveas
responsibility
to tackle
the potentially
devastating
impact
of
for aspects
of water and
drainage,
and they
flooding
which
only likelyto
toco-operate
worsen in the
are under
noisobligation
even
future
in the
of climate
change.
where
it iswake
essential
to deliver
resilience.
● In addition, the ownership of assets is
●diffuse.
Strong leadership:
Government
needs
Statutory flood
risk management
to foster clear
leadershipintroduced
on water issues
strategies
- an obligation
under
andFlood
appoint
Cabinet
champion to
set- in
the
andaWater
Management
Act
train yet
a longer
term visionby
for
delivering
have
to be introduced
many
Lead
a co-ordinated
long termwe
flood
water
Local
Flood Authorities,
haveand
been
told.
management
strategySystems
and it must
ring● S
ustainable Drainage
(SuDS)
– or
fence infrastructure,
funding to do so.
green
such as ponds, swales
●and
Strategic
land review:
water
vegetation,
are a keyThis
part new
of water
champion should
instigate
a review
management
strategy,
and work
alongside
of land use policy,
placing
andmany
proprietary
SuDS. SuDs
canwater
provide
climate change
alongside
a range ofover
other
additional
benefits
to communities
emerging
a multi-functional
and
above priorities
simply thefor
control
of flood risk,
landscape.
such
as enriching the environment and
●P
ublic debate:
There
needs toTraditional
be clarity
absorbing
common
pollutants.
on
what
level ofsystems,
disruption
the typically,
country
piped
drainage
shown,
finds
a result
of water
to costacceptable
more thanasthe
equivalent
of SuDS
exceedance.
Atstudies,
the moment
therebenefits,
are
in Defra’s own
lack these
differing
standards
around
thewater
country.
only serving
to convey
surface
runoff
●L
earning
to live
water:
We falls.
need a
rapidly
away
fromwith
where
the rain
programme
inform
and
● high
SuDSprofile
are only
practical ifto
there
is a robust
educate
the for
public
on theresponsibility
importance
mechanism
ensuring
of
homes
resistant and
formaking
their long
termflood
management
resilient
and managing
and guaranteed
ongoingexpectations
funding
about
water and living
it.
for maintenance.
We arewith
extremely
●More
cash forthat
maintenance:
disappointed
Schedule 3 ofThere
The Flood
needs
to beManagement
even stronger
emphasis
on
and Water
Act
2010, which
maintenance
funding
ensure that
set out plans for
SuDSto
implementation,
existing
floodand
protection
assets
maintenance
adoption,
is notare
being
sustained.
implemented despite extensive backing
●R
etrofitting
for resilience:
from
professionals
and localGovernment
authorities.
should
undertake
an investment
Particularly
disappointing
is the dropping
programme
to retrofit
towns and cities
of plans for local
authority-backed
to
make–them
resilient,
as an
bodies
SuDSmore
Approval
bodies.
These
additional
of theirand
flood
defence
would drawaspect
up standards
ensure
they
spending.
Seeking
through
were enforced,
and synergies
would be responsible
every
aspect ofmaintenance.
regenerationInstead,
and ongoing
for long-term
maintenance
programmes
and by working
Government will
drive the implementation
with
relevant
(highways,
of theall
delivery
ofstakeholders
SuDS only through
water
companies)
also make
encouragement
in will
the normal
planning
retrofitting
more cost effective.
process.
●
etter
design standards:
Everywhere
● B
W
e understand
why Government
should
in
country
is inapplying
a water catchment
bethis
anxious
to avoid
the brakes
so
needbuilding
to reduce
water
runoff
from
to awe
house
sector
which
is now
every
whether
new
or existing
seeingbuilding,
the industry
recover
from
its lowest
–
helpedon
with
newHousing
Buildingavailability
Regulations
outputs
record.
and
for
designingisfor
flood
resistance
and
affordability
one
of the
defining issues
resilience.
of the post-2008 crash in the UK political
●U
sing insurance
toare
incentivise
scene.
However, we
worried that the
resilience:
The insurance
industry
needs
latest proposals
will also store
up problems
to
how it can
incentivise
forgive
the thought
future byto
allowing
developers
to
improving
floodtoresilience
ofpublic
properties,
retain the right
connect to
sewers,
rather
than simply
reinstating
thus further
overloading
drains,structures
as well as
to
inadequate
pre-flooding
standards.
allowing
sites with
fewer than
ten homes to
●U
singSuDS
Floodmeasures
Re insurance
to promote
avoid
altogether.
The
Flood
Re scheme
● resilience:
As it is, there
now
remains
no onedue to
be
introduced
in the
summer
should
responsible
body
for the
adoption
andbe
used
to drive of
a step
change
in households’
maintenance
SuDS.
This will
lead to
protection
and resilience
and we
the continuation
of confusion
and with no
recommend
those
measures setsolution
out by to
obvious short
or medium-term
the Sub-Committee
on Adaptation
effective management
of surface to
water
make
happen should be adopted.
using this
SuDS.
Recommendations
● Considering the most vulnerable:
WeGovernment
would urge an
incoming
Government
needs
to consider
how we
to consider
the following
proposals,
as
protect those
who cannot
afford flood
it continues
tackle the potentially
insurance,toparticularly
those living in
devastating
of flooding,
which is only
tenantedimpact
properties.
Local authorities
likely
the future
the wake of
cantonoworsen
longerin
provide
suchin
discretionary
climate
change.
funding.
● A bigger role for professionals in the
● S
trong
leadership: Promote
Government
needs
built
environment:
greater
to
foster clear leadership
on water
issues
co-ordination
of professionals
through
and
appoint
a Cabinet
champion
to set
a new
CIC grouping
which
could act
as ain
train
a longer
term
visionwhich
for delivering
sounding
board
through
to channel
aflooding
co-ordinated
policy.long term flood and water
management strategy and it must ringfence
funding
to do so.
SuDS
and
maintenance
● S
trategic
This new
We
believeland
the review:
greater uptake
of water
champion
should
instigate
a review
Sustainable
Drainage
Systems
is vital and
of
land
policy, placing
water and
that
theuse
Government
is mistaken
in not
climate
changeSchedule
alongside3ainrange
of other
implementing
the Flood
and
emerging
priorities for
multi-functional
Water Management
Acta 2010
and instead
landscape.
relying on the planning system. Schedule
● Public
There needs
clarity
3 woulddebate:
have ensured
the usetoofbeSuDS
on
on
whatdevelopments
level of disruption
theup
country
all new
and set
SuDS
finds
a result
of waterclarity
Floodsacceptable
Approval as
Bodies
to provide
exceedance.
At the moment
there are
over their management
and maintenance
differing
standards around the country.
and standards.
● Learning to live with water: We need a
profile
programme
to inform andnow
As high
a result
of this
U-turn, Government
educate
the public
on theasimportance
needs
to resolve
as quickly
possible more
of making
homes
flood resistant and
detailed
proposals
for:
and managing
expectations
● resilient
SuDS maintenance:
Ensuring
long
about
water and living
it. for
term management
and with
funding
● M
ore cash forwhich
maintenance:
There
maintenance,
is absolutely
critical
needs
be even stronger
emphasis
if this to
blue-green
infrastructure
is not
on
maintenance
funding
to ensure
that
to fail.
We suggest
that those
homes
and
existing
flood
protection
are
businesses
‘connected’
to assets
SuDS could
sustained.
be charged directly for the maintenance
● R
etrofitting
resilience:
Government
like
a charge for
from
a water company.
should
undertake
an on
investment
The charge
could be
local authority
programme
to retrofit
towns
andtocities
rates and what
is currently
paid
water
to
make them
resilient,
as an be
companies
formore
surface
water should
additional
aspect ofastheir
flood
defence
gradually removed
SuDS
are installed,
spending.
synergies
through
unless it isSeeking
the water
companies
which
every
aspect
of regeneration
provide
the SuDS
service. and ongoing
programmes
and
by working
● maintenance
Reducing loading
on public
sewers:
with
all relevant
stakeholders
Removing
the automatic
right(highways,
to connect
water
companies)
will
make sewers
rainwater
discharge
to also
the public
retrofitting
cost effective.
as originallymore
specified
under the FWMA
● Better
2010. Many
design
of standards:
these publicEverywhere
sewers,
in
this were
country
inVictorian
a water catchment
which
builtisin
times are
so
we need to reduce water runoff from
overloaded.
whether new Ensuring
or existing
● every
SuDSbuilding,
for all developments:
–
helped
withofnew
Building
Regulations
that
the limit
‘fewer
than 10
houses’
for designing
flood resistance
SuDS to befor
included
is changedand
back
resilience.
to two (to avoid a profusion of planning
● U
sing insurance
to incentivise
applications
for nine
houses). As SuDS
resilience:
The insurancethrough
industry
needs
have been demonstrated
Defra’s
to
give
thought
it canparticularly
incentivise
own
research
to to
behow
cheaper,
improving
flood resilience
properties,
where integrated
within theofscheme
rather
than
simply
reinstating structures
from its
original
masterplanning,
the
to
inadequate
standards. reason
for the pre-flooding
threshold as ‘keeping
the
● Using
Flood
Re insurance
to companies
promote
regulatory
burden
on smaller
resilience:
Thelevel’
FloodisRe
scheme, due
at a reasonable
erroneous.
be introduced
in the
summer
2015,
● to
National
standards
needed:
Detailing
should
be used
to drive
a step
change
how it can
be ensured
that
SuDS
are in
households’
and resilience
designed to aprotection
set of national
standardsand
we
recommend
those
set out
as part
of the basis
formeasures
new planning
by
the Sub-Committee on Adaptation to
guidance.
this happen
should
be adopted.
● make
Resolving
adoption
of SuDS:
Defining
● C
the most
vulnerable:
a onsidering
clear procedure
and any
associated
Government
needs to consider
how the
costs for the adoption
of sites under
we
protectplanning-based
those who cannot
afford
proposed
system,
as the
flood
particularly
those
lack ofinsurance,
such a process
has historically
living
in tenanted
properties.
been the
greatest limitation
toLocal
the uptake
authorities
of SuDS. can no longer provide such
discretionary funding.
built environment: Promote greater
co-ordination of professionals through
a new Construction Industry Council
grouping which could act as a sounding
board through which to channel
flooding policy.
SuDS and maintenance
● We believe the greater uptake of
Sustainable Drainage Systems is vital and
that the Government is mistaken in not
implementing Schedule 3 in the Flood
and Water Management Act 2010 and
instead relying on the planning system.
Schedule 3 would have ensured the use
of SuDS on all new developments and
set up SuDS Floods Approval Bodies to
provide clarity over their management
and maintenance and standards.
7
35
Living with water
Section 4:
Concluding remarks
and recommendations
32
8
32
Abbott J., et al
(2013). Creating water
sensitive places –
scoping the potential
for Water Sensitive
Urban Design in the
UK. CIRIA publication
C724. http://www.ciria.
org/Resources/Free_
publications/Creating_
water_sens1.aspx
Despite
an of
increased
focusGovernment
on flood
As
a result
this U-turn,
now
management,
weasconsider
Englandmore
is
needs
to resolve
quickly that
as possible
missing proposals
an opportunity
detailed
for: to put in place a
sustainable
long-term strategy.
The
strategy
●
SuDS maintenance:
Ensuring
long
must
protect
homes against
the increased
term
management
and funding
for
flooding
we are likely
toissee
in the wake
of
maintenance,
which
absolutely
critical
climate
and greater
urbanisation,
if thischange
blue-green
infrastructure
is not
while
at the
same
timethat
safeguard
againstand
to fail.
We
suggest
those homes
increased
water
scarcity. to SuDS could
businesses
‘connected’
We
overwhelming
evidence
calling
be heard
charged
directly for the
maintenance
for like
a more
holistic
approach
water
a charge
from
a waterto
company.
management
canbebalance
the
impact of
The chargethat
could
on local
authority
increased
surface
run-off
with
rates and
what water
is currently
paid
to what
wateris
predicted
to befor
a water
shortage
causedbe
by
companies
surface
water should
drought.
gradually removed as SuDS are installed,
Inunless
short,itwhat
iswater
required
is a fundamental
is the
companies
which
change
in how
view
flood management,
provide
the we
SuDS
service.
from
flood defence
where
we protect
●
Reducing
loading
on public
sewers:
ourselves
to one
resilience,right
living
and
Removing
theof
automatic
to with
connect
making
spacedischarge
for waterto
and
the
opportunity
rainwater
the
public
sewers
to get
“more from
less” byunder
seeingthe
all FWMA
forms of
as originally
specified
water
as providing
multiple
benefits.
2010.
Many of these
public
sewers,
The
principles
for in
this
were explained
by
which
were built
Victorian
times, are
evidence
from CIRIA and Arup in terms of
overloaded.
“water sensitive urban design” (WSUD), a
term and approach developed in Australia
that is gaining traction in many countries
as a means of managing all aspects of
water together with the planning of urban
development and regeneration processes for
maximum societal benefit32.
Though this is by no means a new
philosophy - and to a certain extent the
UK has been working towards it - from
the evidence we heard in our Inquiry there
are huge challenges still to be overcome to
ensure that we have the administrative and
physical infrastructure in place to achieve
this.
To begin with, we have what has been
described as the most disconnected water
management system in the world. Too many
organisations have responsibility for aspects
of water and drainage, and they are under
no obligation to co-operate even where
it is essential to deliver resilience. Local
authorities are primarily in charge of surface
water, although the water companies share
some
responsibilities,
and the Environment
●
SuDS
Ensuring
Agency
is responsible
for flooding
related
that the
limit of ‘fewer
than 10 houses’
to coastal
areas
andincluded
rivers, and
they do back
for SuDS
to be
is changed
notto
always
work
together
– even
two (to
avoid
a profusion
ofthough
planning
legislation
is in place
to enforce
duty
to
applications
for nine
houses).a As
SuDS
co-operate
and
the Environment
Agency
has
have been
demonstrated
through
Defra’s
a duty
the to
FWMA
2010 to
coordinate
ownunder
research
be cheaper,
particularly
andwhere
overview
flooding
as a whole.
integrated
within
the scheme
Infrom
addition,
the ownership
of assetsthe
is
its original
masterplanning,
diffuse.
Statutory
flood risk as
management
reason
for the threshold
‘keeping the
strategies,
an obligation
under
regulatory
burden onintroduced
smaller companies
theat
Flood
and Water
Management
Act, have
a reasonable
level’
is erroneous.
yetNational
to be introduced
by needed:
many Lead
Local
●
standards
Detailing
Flood
authorities,
we werethat
told.
In addition,
how
it can be ensured
SuDS
are
there
are many
wherestandards
riparian
designed
to aexamples,
set of national
landowners
proximity
a watercourse
as part ofinthe
basis forto
new
planning
do not
discharge their maintenance
guidance.
responsibilities.
Often, this
is dueDefining
to lack
●
Resolving adoption
of SuDS:
of awareness
of the duties,
orassociated
in the case
a clear procedure
and any
of covered
they are
costs forwatercourses,
the adoptionbecause
of sites under
the
unaware
of their
existence. system, as the
proposed
planning-based
What
is such
more,a this
fragmented
approach
lack of
process
has historically
been
is mirrored
at a limitation
higher political
where,
the greatest
to thelevel
uptake
of
again,
there appears to be no Government
SuDS.
leadership and no one single department
as a whole nor for flooding across all of the
The damaging impact of this schism
has been demonstrated recently with the
long-running saga of the implementation
of Sustainable Drainage Systems, which are
seen as essential in catchment wide flood
water management. Defra’s initially positive
approach to SuDS has been increasingly
weakened over the last four years by
Government’s concerns about putting the
brakes on house building, culminating in
the change of approach to a planning based
system through DCLG.; a scheme, which
during its consultation saw all the built
environment institutions in opposition to
the proposals. Many SuDS are called bluegreen infrastructure, which mimics natural
storage and attenuation processes with
features like ponds, swales and wetlands.
Though this needs to be in conjunction with
Section 1:
The Inquiry
1.1
the Inquiry
hardAbout
traditional
flood defences we were told
The
of climate
change
and this
it is agrowth
more cost
effective
approach;
urbanisation
is expected
to result
in greater
is supported by
Defra’s own
cost-benefit
risk
of flooding
in the UK if
inconsidered
the 21st Century.
assessments,
particularly
at the
How
threat is one of the biggest
outsetwe
intackle
spatialthe
planning.
challenges
by society.
This,and
theothers
third
Evidencefaced
presented
by CIRIA
Inquiry
of Therepeatedly
All Party Parliamentary
to the Inquiry
demonstratedGroup
that
for
Excellence
in theadditional
Built Environment,
SuDS
provide many
benefits to
looks
at the problems
to the UK
communities
over andcaused
above simply
theby
flooding
examines
theas
potential
for
control ofand
flood
risk, such
enriching
greater
mitigationand
of these
problems
and
the environment
absorbing
common
significantly
improvingpiped
flood drainage
resilience
pollutants. Traditional
including
the potential
for adaptation
systems, shown
to typically
cost more to
than
changing
environmental
We very
the equivalent
SuDS frompressures.
Defra’s own
much
seelack
ourthese
findings
as theonly
beginning
studies,
benefits,
servingoftoa
dialogue
with a water
new Government.
convey surface
runoff rapidly away
This
report
is rain
the result
from
where
the
falls of an open Inquiry
into
flood mitigation
resilience.
However,
SuDS are and
onlyfuture
practical
if
As
such
appropriate
organisations
dealing
there
is aall
robust
mechanism
for ensuring
with
the impacts
flooding,
flood defence,
responsibility
forof
their
long term
mitigation
and
resilience
wereongoing
invited to
management
and
guaranteed
submit
and oral But
supplementation
fundingevidence,
for maintenance.
establishing
was
requested
from
a number
of them. The
a way
forward has
proved
problematic.
In itsand
callWater
for evidence,
the Commission
Flood
Management
Act 2010
was
particularly
for practical
set out
plans forlooking
SuDS implementation,
strategies
thatand
would,
for example,
improve
maintenance
adoption
in Schedule
3
flood
adaptation
andafter
mitigation,
of theprotection,
Act. However,
four years
its
as
well as enable
better
assessment
of
introduction,
theaissue
has
still not been
flood
risk and aThe
consequent
improvement
fully resolved.
neat solution
originallyin
insurance
and
valuation
issues. up of localput forward
was
for the setting
The weight of evidence
weSuDS
received
authority-backed
bodies –
Approval
focussed
on the
needdraw
for long-term
water
bodies. These
would
up standards
and
management
and enforced
the means
of be
providing
a
ensure they were
and
responsible
sustainable
and
affordable strategy
for long-term
maintenance.
Instead,to deal
with
the impacts
climate
change – in
Government
will of
drive
the implementation
essence
movingofaway
from
defence to
of the delivery
SuDS
onlyflood
through
one
of ‘Living with
water’
. Thatplanning
was perhaps
encouragement
in the
normal
hardly
surprising given the timing and back
process.
drop
toisthe
Inquiry. Evidence
was taken
at a
So it
disappointing
that there
will no
time
when
Government’s
approach
to the
longer
be a the
requirement
for SuDS
Approval
adoption
of Sustainable
Drainage
Systems
bodies, which
would have
lifted many
of
was
very much
a key plank of the
the barriers
to implementation
as‘Living
they with
water’
the adoption
of SuDS
would concept
have putbut
in place
arrangements
for
was
uncertain and was creating widespread
maintenance.
concern
amongst professionals
in the built
We understand
why the Government
environment.
Thisto
has
meant
that inthe
the
should be anxious
avoid
applying
time
wetohave
had building
available,sector
given the
looming
brakes
a house
which
election,
our scrutiny
of approaches
is not
is now seeing
the industry
recover from
comprehensive
andon
dorecord.
not specifically
its lowest outputs
Housing deal
with
coastaland
andaffordability
ground water
and
availability
is flooding
one of the
defences.
defining issues of the post-2008 crash in the
What
has come
UK
political
scene.over unequivocally was
the
risks
doare
with
water that
exceedance
and
Even
so,towe
worried
the latest
shortages
likelyup
to problems
increase infor
proposals are
willmost
also store
severity
asby
a result
of climate
change,
yet
the future
allowing
developers
to retain
the information
presented
to us
was one of
right to connect
to public
sewers,
confused
policy
and missed
opportunity,
thus further
overloading
drains,
as well as
despite
evidence.
allowingclear
sitesscientific
with fewer
than ten homes to
Hence,
this
report also
stresses the
avoid
SuDS
measures
altogether.
need
for remains
the integration
flood water
There
no one of
responsible
body for
management,
as we
move from of
anSuDS.
approach
the adoption and
maintenance
This
based
on to
flood
to one
flood
will lead
the defences
continuation
of of
confusion,
resilience,
and a more
holistic and
with the effective
management
of integrated
surface
approach
to water
generally.
water using
SuDS management
gradually becoming
the
Written
was submitted
theas
norm
onlyevidence
over a lengthy
period of in
time
Autumn
of 2014,
and three
sessions,
it is the only
affordable
wayopen
to deal
with
where
was presented,
took
climateoral
andevidence
other societal
changes as
stated
place
during November
and December.
independently
by both Ofwat
and Defra.
The
APPG
fortoEBE
ofclear
There
needs
be aCommission
definitive and
Inquiry
comprises
members
ofmajor
both Houses
arrangement
that compels
the
of
Parliament,tosenior
members
the
stakeholders
co-operate.
Theofproposed
construction
professions
and key
planning based
regime is likely
to influencers
result
and
in other
aspects
in a decision
complex makers
and highly
variable
set ofof
society.
standards for surface water being applied
that will vary between planning authorities.
1.2
Members
of the
Commission
Some
authorities
may
“compete” to have
Oliver
Colvile MP
(chairman)
developments
in their
area by diluting the
George
need to Adams
manage surface water in the best way,
Peter
Aldous MP
for maximum
community benefit. This is
Professor
potentiallyRichard
a recipeAshley
for chaos and as planning
Peter
Bonfield
OBE do not correspond with
authority
boundaries
Tony
Burton
drainage
catchment boundaries, a recipe for
Sue
poorIllman
control of flooding within catchments.
The
Earl forward
of Lyttonall(vice
chairman)points to
Going
the evidence
Jack
floodPringle
risk as getting worse and costing us
Rt
HonThe
Nick
Raynsford
(vicefor
chairman)
more.
alternative
isMP
paying
insurance
based on average annual damages that are up
1.3
Secretariat
to six
times the cost of fixing the problem.
Graham
Watts
OBE are to be financed is a
How flood
defences
Denise
Chevin (rapporteur
and report
very significant
challenge. Funding
forauthor)
capital
Tamara
projectsDale
and maintenance of assets, both
hard and soft, is likely to remain an issue in
the foreseeable future. Yet despite these ever
increasing challenges flood resilience and
water management still remains something
of a Cinderella issue at the highest political
9
33
Living with water
Section 2:
30
10
1
https://www.gov.uk/
government/policies/
reducing-the-threats-offlooding-and-coastalchange
2
https://www.gov.
uk/government/
publications/uk-climate30
change-risk-assessmenthttp://www.theccc.
government-report
org.uk/wp-content/
3
Stephen
Garvin, Director
uploads/2013/11/
of
Centre for Resilience,
ANNEX-to-Letter-to-RtA future
Flood Resilient
Hon-Owen-PatersonBuilt
Environment,
MP-22Nov13.pdf
31
Building
Research
Letter from
Lord
Establishment
Krebs,
Chairman
4
Future
Flooding,
April
of the
Adaptation
2004,Government
Office
Sub-Committee
to
for Science,
of Flood
Brendanpart
McCafferty,
and coastal
defence
Chief
Executive
Flood
Foresight
Re, February
2015
5
Colin
Thorne, of the
http://www.theccc.
School
of Geography,
org.uk/wp-content/
University
of Nottingham,
uploads/2015/02/2015The Geographical
02-02-Lord-Krebs-toJournal,
Vol 180, No 4
Brendan-McCaffertyDecember
2014
Flood-Re.pdf
concerned
the impact the scheme may
2.1
Scale ofabout
the problem
havewill
on property
prices.the
“How
do valuers
Few
have forgotten
devastating
properly
residential
floods
in appraise
December
2013 and assets
early inwhere
2014,
the guarantee
of flood
insurance
coverof
is a
when
rail networks
closed,
thousands
shrinking
asset?
If the homeowner
homes
were
left without
power andtypically
in some
takes of
onthe
a 25-year
mortgage
there
parts
country
residentsbut
had
to beis only
15 years left
on Flood
Re, what
evacuated
from
their homes.
Inthen?”
Bostonasked
in
Philip Wilbourn
representing
Lincolnshire
the most
serious the
tidalRICS.
surge
the Adaptation
in But
60 years
led to 300 Sub-Committee
homes flooded. on
Climate Change
pointed
outsea
in 2013
after the
Meanwhile,
a section
of the
wall in
agreement
was reached
between
Government
Dawlish,
Devon,
collapsed
and left
the
and theto
Association
of British Insurers
railway
Cornwall suspended
in mid-air.
toSerious
set up Flood
Re30can
that
without
a clear
flooding
happen
at any
time
transitionary
framework
agreedproblems
at the outset,
and
is one of the
most difficult
there isusthe
that difficult
decisions
facing
as risk
a nation.
In December
2013,to
reducewas,
thefor
benefit
of Flood
Re toacross
high risk
there
instance
flooding
households
and insurers
will be
continually
southern
England,
stretching
through
postponed
by the government
the day.
Dorset,
Hampshire,
Surrey andof
Kent,
and The
Committee
pointed
out
that
unless50,000
Flood
extensive
power
cuts,
with
around
Re provided
incentives
for power
improving
flood
homes
remaining
without
through
resilience
it will
provide
pretty poor
value for
the
Christmas
period.
Flooding
impacts
money. into the New Year and early
continued
It has where
said: “We
currently
January
those
hit the expect
hardestthe
included
number
of households
at significant
flood
the
Somerset
Levels, which
was inundated
riskthe
to increase
overin
the
coming
for
second time
two
years.decades.
Current
investment
plans are
to
According
to Department
forinsufficient
Environment,
counter
the combination
of deterioration
in
Food
& Rural
Affairs (Defra),
more than five
existingproperties
flood defences,
rise, and the
million
are at sea
risklevel
of flooding
more
frequent
intense
rainfall
in
England,
thatand
is nearly
one
in six.patterns
There
predicted.
This
remains
the case
are
also more
than
200 homes
at despite
risk of the
recent recovery
capitalerosion
investment
complete
loss toin
coastal
in theand
next
theyears.
planned
inflation
through
20
It isincreases
possible with
that 2,000
more
could
to 2021. at
Spending
theperiod,
maintenance
of 1
become
risk overonthis
Defra says.
existing
defences
has
been
in decline.
Unless
Analysis
from the
UK
Climate
Change
Risk
transition occurs,
weindicates
can expect
more
Assessment
(CCRA)
that
the built
households towill
become
underwritten
by Flood
environment
be affected
by extreme
Re over time.
This
wouldwill
create
a growing
weather
events.
Impacts
arise
through
burden of temperatures
costs falling on
other
insurance
increased
and
changing
rainfall
2
bill payers.
The current
assessment
patterns
. Flood
risk willimpact
increase
not only
for the
policychange,
does not
take
account
of future
from
climate
but
also
as a result
of
climate projections.”
increasing
urbanisation.
In the
long-term,
most sustainable
and
The
expected
costthe
of damage
to residential
cost-effective
of and
achieving
affordable
properties
fromway
tidal
river flooding
flood insurance
is to
to rise
reduce
the
risk million
of
alone
is projected
from
£640
flooding.
Re£1.1
spreads
thebyrisk
it
at
presentFlood
to over
billion
the–2020s.
will not
reduce
it unlessthe
it is
designed
to
This
does
not consider
impact
of surface
incentivise
peopleflooding,
to do so. nor the damage
water
or sewerage
to the
Environment
Agency,
toAccording
non-domestic
buildings,
says the
Building
3
each £1 spent
on flood defence
reduces as it
Research
Establishment
. Additionally,
future damages
by damage
an average
£8. Each
points
out, “Initial
is one
cost, but
£1 invested
property-level
protection
repair
costs in
and
insurance premiums
must
typically
achieves benefits
of £5 term.
or more.
also
be considered
in the longer
There
Flood
does not
reduce
flood losses;
it
is
alsoRe
a social
aspect
to consider,
as flooding
protects
some from
the costs
flooding
causes
significant
distress
andofpotential
at the expense
of others. Overall, including
health
problems.”
the
“distributional”
or “equity”
Inadditional
2004 the Flood
Foresight report,
looking
benefits
of Flood
policy
achieves
at
the risks
to theRe,
UKthe
from
flooding
and 70
pence inerosion
benefits
perthe
£1 next
of economic
cost.
coastal
over
100 years,
This can
be improved
if Flood
Re becomes
made
assumptions
about
the implications
instrumental
in incentivising
additional
of
climate change
for long-term
flood risk.
flood
risk reduction.
In
general
terms, it suggested that by 2080
climate change is likely to increase river flood
The Adaptation
on Climate
risks
by between Sub
two Committee
and four times,
coastal
Change
called
forto
a number
measures
flood
risk
by four
10 times,ofwhile
flood
including:
damage
from urban drainage systems by
●The Flood
between
threeRe
andadministrator
30 times4. 31 could be
a roletointhis
lawInquiry,
to promote
awareness
Ingiven
evidence
a group
of
and to share
the
information
it will
14 academics
and
experts
– the technical
hold
on flood
risk with
householders,
team
engaged
in Flood
Foresight
– said
public authorities,
andvalid,
perhaps
the
thatthe
assessment
still remains
having
general
public
in the
of house
been
updated
in 2007
forcontext
Sir Michael
Pitt’s
purchasing
decisions.the
Flood
Reare
offers
Inquiry,
and if anything,
risks
even
the potential,
for the first time, for a
greater
now.
dialogue evidence
with the they
highest
Intargeted
their submitted
toldrisk
us,
households
insay
thewhether
country.the floods of
“It is
too early to
●Placewere
floodcaused
risk reduction
atchange,
the corebut
2013/14
by climate
Flood Re’s purpose.
Rather
theof
atmospheric
phenomena
that than
produced
solely
pay flood claims,
households
them
are consistent
with the
expected
underwritten
Flood Re
be
impacts
of global by
warming
on could
the Jetstream
in certain
circumstances
be
andoffered
winter and
storms.
It follows
that work must
required
to fit property-level
measures
continue
to better
understand and
predict
have flood resilient
repairs
after aand
theor
probabilities,
intensities,
durations
flood
event. The benefit
to Flood
Re’s
spatial
distributions
of UK flood
events,
finances,
and
therefore
long-term
to provide
the
science
basethe
from
which
levyand
requirement,
be substantial
to plan
implementwill
responses
that areas
over timeand
Flood
Re’s exposure to claims
appropriate
sustainable.”
wouldare
diminish.
Floods
expensive too: the economic
cost of the summer floods of 2007 was about
It also
says
that
Floodannual
Re is likely
£3.2
billion
and
average
floodto
damages
accumulate
significant
reserves, of
are
estimated
to accrue cash
to somewhere
5
which a small
be used
between
£500 proportion
million andcould
£1 billion
.
to manage 13
down
thedied.
long-term levy
Tragically,
people
requirement
through
riskthe
reduction
activity.
As Colin Thorne,
from
School of
And the Committee
called
on the also
Geography
at Nottingham
University,
Government
to set out,
in legislation,
points
out, “Flooding
is perhaps
complicated:
firstly,
a framework
the costs
and types
benefits
because
therefor
arehow
several
different
of of
floods
- river,
coastal,
surface
water
(pluvial)
Flood Re
will be
phased
out over
its proposed
and
groundwater;
and secondly,
most
20-25
year timeframe.
“Withoutbecause
this
floods
are actually
combinations
ofhigh
theserisk
commitment,
important
signals to
types.
This combination
of types,
households
will be lost, and
Flood known
Re could
as
coincident
flooding,
was
a hallmark
of on
become
a permanent
and
growing
burden
the
winter
of 2013/2014,
which featured
other
policyholders,”
it said.
sequences
and eventsFlood
In a letteroftoand
theclusters
newly appointed
involving
various combinations
of tidal,
Re chief executive
in July, Lord Krebs,
rainfall,
river and
groundwater
sources”
the Chairman
of the
Adaptation
Sub- 6.
Of the more
than 5.2the
million
homes at
Committee
reiterates
Committee’s
risk
of flooding
million
concerns
about in
theEngland,
scheme.over
The2letter
says:
are
at risk
or coastal flooding
“Flood
Re from
offersriver
the opportunity
to achieve
and
approximately
3.8 million
are at risk
a step
change in household
protection
from
surface water
flooding,
to
and resilience
measures
overaccording
its lifetime.
the
Environment
Agency.
Around
1 million
However,
the scheme
is not
currently
homes
are at
of flooding
from
both.
configured
torisk
achieve
this.” He
went
on to
Insurance
from
the 2007
surface
set out fiveclaims
ways of
designing
Flood
re to
water
floods
outnumbered
claims costs
for river
promote
flood
alleviation, reduce
and
and
sea flooding
6:1. In fact, as rain falls
improve
value forbymoney.
everywhere
in the country,
eachInsurers
and every
As the Association
of British
says:
property
at risk from
heavy
–
“There isiscurrently
no limit
torainfall
the number
even
properties
situated
onFlood
high ground,
of times
a property
within
Re can as
property
drainage
normally
to
be flooded
and stillisbe
covereddesigned
within the
cope
withFlood
storms
occur
on average
scheme.
Re that
will be
reviewed
after once
five
7
in
30 years
. changes that are considered
years
and any
Climate change
is occurring
at aand
pace
necessary
will be discussed
with
that
is steadily
these
odds.However,
We
approved
by thereducing
Secretary
of State.
were
that
commonly
Floodtold
Re is
only
designed used
to bestatements
operational
such
“5.2 million
properties
are atto
risk
for 25asyears,
and is not
the solution
theof
flooding”
- even
the Environment
Agency
UK’s rising
floodby
threat,
which requires
-Government
can be unhelpful,
as they lull
rest of on
commitment
andthe
spending
the
into a solutions.”
false sense of security
longpopulation
term ambitious
that
they
areissafe
from
This was
Our
view
that,
as itflooding.
stands, Flood
Re is
demonstrated
in Hampshire
in 2014,
where
a missed opportunity
for driving
uptake
of
groundwater
flooding
in many for
resilient repairs
after adeveloped
flood, particularly
areas
chalk land
that had
seen
flooding
thoseof
properties
subject
to not
repeat
flooding.
8
previously
. Evidence
from Heriot-Watt
In addition,
the introduction
of Flood
University,
specialists
in building
drainage,
Re could still
leave vulnerable
those
who
supported
theinsurance
understanding
that
many
cannot afford
and we
would
more
six million
properties
like tothan
see more
done to
support are
thein fact
at
risk. Local authorities used to do this,
poorest.
Nevertheless,
BRE’s paper
says:severely
“Pluvial
but
now their funding
has been
floods
arethey
the can
typeno
most
likely
to increase
reduced
longer
provide
such in
severity
as a result
of climate
change.
They
discretionary
funding.
We would
suggest
are
the most difficult
to manage”
thatalso
Government
look at this
aspect .again
In see
the what
past, more
flooding
hasbe
been
traditionally
and
could
done
for the
managed
engineering
least wellby
off,large-scale
particularly
those living in
solutions,
whereby entire towns and
tenanted properties.
communities
are protected
by hard
The Association
of British
(structural)
defences
like Re
walls,
Insurers flood
explains
Flood
embankments and at the coast, beaches
Thesand
ABI and
the But increasingly
enable insurers
tois
pass
and
dunes.
there
a
Government agreed
the flood risk element
recognised
need
to
move
away
from
flood
a Memorandum of
of home insurance
defences
to a risk-based
approach
that
aims
Understanding
(MoU)
(buildings
and
contents)
in June
on how Thisatuses
a premium
that will
for
flood2013
resilience.
a combination
develop
a not-for-with holistic
be capped
depending
oftoflood
defences
management
profit scheme - Flood
on the property’s
ofRefluvial,
coastal
and
surface
water
flood
– to allow flood
Council Tax band (see
risk,
usingtoaremain
range of measures
that can
help
insurance
below). Flood
Re will
widely affordable
and and
not
set premium rates.
reduce
the likelihood
consequences
of
available,and
whileupstream
allowing catchment
Insurers will measures
pass into
flooding
a sustainable transition
Flood Re those high
totoimprove
the resilienceflood
of land,
buildings
risk reflective pricing
risk homes they
and
infrastructure.
(A
building
that
over 25 years. The
feel unable to is
insure
not-for-profit
company
themselves..
resilient
to flood
is one that
has the ability to
– Flood in
Re such
– will allow
all home
recover
a way as Separately,
to keep functioning
insurers to pass the
insurance customers
following
a
flood.)
flood risk element of a
will pay a levy into the
Floodinsurance
risk management
canThis
be isachieved
home
policy
fund.
not an
into amoveable
fund that will
pay
additional
amount (on
with
defences
such as barriers,
any subsequent
flood
average £10.50(and
a year
passive
measures
like embankments
claim. It is designed to
on all home insurance
also
planting of grass and
trees to increase
enable high flood risk
policies) as it broadly
water
infiltration
to
soil),
emergency
households to obtain
reflects the existing
affordably priced
flood
cross-subsidy
between
management
measures
(flood
warnings
and
insurance. managementlower
andand
higher
emergency
plans)
improved
In face of the rising
flood risks. This levy,
resilience
to speed recovery
after flood
flood risk, we have
along with Flood Re’s
events
occur.
estimated
that
premium income, will
between
300,000 – evidence
be used
to cover
CIRIA provided
of the
needthe
to
500,000
exposure
thoseto
high
reflect
onflood-risk
how events, that
causefor
water
UK households would
risk homes that insurers
bestruggle
on thetosurface
in urban
areas, due to
obtain
pass into Flood Re.
limited
drainage
capacity
or
but
affordably priced flood
Floodblockages,
Re is planned
to
insurance
without
be open for
business
that
do not
causea flood damage,
should
be in
scheme like Flood
Re.
the second
half of 2015.
considered.
The public
should
be encouraged
It will provide a fund to
to see such events as “big puddles” or as
harmless water flowing along gutters and
kerbs. This exceedance drainage should be
recognised as an acceptable way of managing
water on the surface, providing it is done
in such a way as to avoid unacceptable
problems. Climate change means that
water on the surface will become more
commonplace in future and will need to
be managed carefully to avoid having to
keep building new drainage capacity at
unaffordable expense. This will need greater
cooperation between those responsible,
including the Lead Local Flood Authorities,
Highway Authorities and others.
Importantly, the way in which we lay out our
11
31
Colin Thorne, as above
British Standard on
Building Drainage BS
12056 (2000)
8
http://www.theguardian.
com/news/2014/
feb/16/weatherwatchgroundwater-flooding
6
7
Living with water
28
12
http://www.theccc.org.
uk/publication/climatechange-is-the-ukpreparing-for-floodingand-water-scarcity-3rdprogressreport
27
copyright
thehow
Environment
Agency needs
moment and
withits
local
authoritieshas
and
the
urban
areasofand
they are planned,
flooding
management
advanced
prevents
anythe
useneed
of the
forexceedance
commercial
Environmentsince
Agency
trying
to develop
to
recognise
fordata
these
significantly
2008.
Natural
flood
gain. Having this
restriction
lifted“blue
would be
solutions. Places
Leicester
got
management
measures,
including
management
andlike
working
withhave
natural
of enormous
help
to thewater
consumer.
Thewhere
devil processes
river flooding
problems,
they’ve
also
routes”
passing
surface
to places
are part
of the but
solution
to our
is inimpact
the detail.
We wait This
to seemay
what
is being
got substantial
surface
problems, and
the
is negligible.
involve
future
river, surface
andwater
groundwater
published.”kerb heights and subtle alterations flooding
the reason
they’re struggling
is because
the
modifying
problems,
but only when
combined
situationand
currently
certainly
two sources
of hazard
are not
equally well
to“The
road cambers
grassy is
areas
to ensure
with
engineered
defences
in integrated
ludicrous.
We are
understood.
if you’re
with a
the
water flows
theconcerned
right way.that the
portfolios
ofAnd
structural
anddealing
non-structural
consumer
isflooding
being poorly
advised
the
flooding problem, you need to make sure you
Managing
and water
onat
the
measures.”
momentwill
andbecome
that much
more work
can be
deal
with
theussources
of the flooding. So
surface
a complex
interplay
The
ICEall
told
in its submission:
done to ensure
make
informed
we should invest
getinfrastructure
to understand this
between
how wethat
lay they
out our
urban
areas,
“Catchment
wideand
green
choiceswe
when
their
homes.”
hazard better.”
where
buildbuying
and how
weown
adapt
our
solutions,
especially upstream - offer the
However,
another
concern
was
the
existing
areas.
Not all
of those
responsible
opportunity to reduce or delay runoff from
accuracy
ofinvolved
data more
which
3.7 Insurance
issues
for
getting
in generally,
this process
yet has
catchments.
These
measures can also provide
repercussions
forrole
spatial
planning
and
the to many
One ofother
the most
concerning
flood
understand
their
or the
need for
them
benefits
such as aspects
creatingof
and
viabilitydoing
of development.
Spatial
planning
is
mitigationhabitats,
we considered
wasbiodiversity,
insurance change
things “the way
we have
always
restoring
enhancing
seen as
a keythere
aspect
managing
flood risk
particularly
the practice
in which
insurance
done”
. Thus,
isof
a need
to reconsider
capturing
carbon,
reducing
sedimentation
in a number
ways:
through
general
land
claims
pay to cover
cost ofItreinstating
the
how
we plan of
and
layout
our urban
areas.
and
improving
waterthe
quality.
can also help
useaddition,
planningthe
in interplay
determining
largerupland
scale land to
flood-damaged
propertywater
to itsresources,
state before
In
between
preserve and manage
issues,
and land
allocations;
flooding, andimportant
therefore in
theareas
restored
property
management of
catchments
and
downstream increasingly
where
there
at the development
level, for
ensuring
that
is no
moresupply
protected
to stopThis
the same
impacts
is well understood
and
there are
are
water
pressures.
type of
all new build mitigates
own areas
flood better
risk
problem
happening
again. can make a
opportunities
to protectitsurban
joined
up,from
longer-term
thinking
andfor
any
potential
downstreamorimpacts;
Adaptation
Sub-Committee’s
by,
example,
reforestation
changes in
bigThe
difference
to our
flood resilience.”progress
27
and throughpractices.
regeneration
and projectapproach
based
report
found
that
there
is considerable
agricultural
An integrated
However,
what
also
became
increasingly
initiatives
to retrofit SuDS
or plan
specific
scope to cost
reduce
flood was
to
flood management
is required
across
apparent
fromeffectively
the submitted
evidence
flood alleviation
measures.
losses
by households
propertycatchments
at a variety
of spatial scales.
that
there
are still toofitting
many barriers
to the
Witnesses
up this
the need
to map
levelup
measures,
such asapproaches
flood gates–and
air
The
need toflagged
reinforce
integrated
take
of landscaped
which
out data problems
with surface
water
brick covers.
It found
that theSystems
historic pace
approach
was madebetter
continually
throughout
include
Sustainable
Drainage
and Inquiry.
claimedFor
fewexample,
of the models
being used
of fitting
measures
would
to
our
the evidence
(SuDS)
–such
not least
because
of a need
lack of
to assess and
this hazard
taketechnical
explicit
increase by a factor
ofof
20ownership
in order toand
reach
submitted
by map
the Flood
Foresight
understanding,
a lack
account
of the impact
of below-ground
support
all the appropriate
households
team
explained:
“Our understanding
of
aand
lack
of maintenance
funding, and
too
drainageprocesses
systems.associated
The financial
squeeze
by 2035.
Yet, wewater
heardmanagement
from witnesses
natural
with
inland on
many
different
bodies
local authorities makes the most up to date
that, after floods, homes are refurbished
and accurate modelling systems unaffordable. without including any additional flood
Source of flood
The sea and
From rivers and
From direct rainfall Groundwater
Will McCann of Arup
said: “Every single
resilient measures, even in high
risk areas.
coastal erosion
watercourses
Primary Source
city and urban area in this country now has
Stephen Garvin of BRE showed us how much
Source water
Sea
level rise,
Burst
and
Exceeding
Heavy
aPrimary
set of surface
hazard
maps which
arebanksknowledge
there is about how
bestrainfall
to doand
this
surges, waves
overtopping
capacity of
aquifer flows
made using quite simplified assumptions
and how recent
advances
in
technology
now
drainage system
about surface water. And when you actually
make fitting resistance measures much more
Impact
in rural in detail,
At the
coast - that
loss they
Inundation of
AsIn
forApril
rivers 2014
and theMay
be extensive
look
at them
it shows
affordable.
Government
areas
or inundation of
agricultural and
watercourses
remote from
are
simplifications and
the situation can
be
introduced
a £5000 grant forand
homeowners
productive land/
non-productive
where the rain
rather different. Now
that information land,
is in towns
whose
The
non-productive
and property had been flooded.
occurred
used by spatial planners to inform the spatial
scheme will close at the end of March 2015,
villages
planning process, to decide where to put
but we understand that its uptake has been
Impact in towns
At the coast –
Major devastation
Anywhere is at risk
Mainly occurs
housing
and
decide
where
the
high
hazard
low28.
and cities
inundation and
due to inundation
(we are all in the
where there are
areas are, so it is important
that that process
produce
guidanceaquifers
to educate
loss of property/
adjacent to & Insurers
rain
catchment),
spreading out
from
especially
our
is informed by goodassets
information.
homeowners
on increasing
resilience of
watercourses
houses
“I also think there’s a big problem at the
their homes
and point out that it will reduce
and
authorities
propagate
integrated
premiums.
The to
ABI
says thatan
insurers
are
approach
water and
flood that
management.
willing to to
undertake
repairs
increase
resilience as long as they are cost neutral29.
2.2
Sources
flooding told us: “There is no
As one
of ourofwitnesses
Sources
flooding
are various,
as to build
incentiveoffor
insurance
companies
summarised
in the
left. has
In many
back better once
thetable
damage
been areas
done,
more
than
oneisofno
these
types can
at the
because
there
guarantee
thatoccur
they’re
same
for example,
river
flooding
going time
to getwith,
the premiums
back
over
the next
from
burst banks happening at the same
few years.”
time
as local
heavy rainfall,
causing flooding
Andrew
Wescott
of the Institution
of Civil
in
the streets.
There are
also important
Engineers
concurred,
saying:
“You might say
interactions
between
coasts
and
to insurers that
if theyrivers,
pay for
betterment
it’s
how
towns
and
cities drain
waterbut
away.
goingour
to save
the
problem
next time,
they
In
the look
2007atfloods,
for instance,
flooding
won’t
that because
that householder
occurred
in cities
likenext
Sheffield,
could change
insurer
week.as the street
drainage
system
could not drain
water
intoare
“Insurers
are businesses
and what
they
the
streams
rivers,that
duethe
to the
riverget
water
trying
to do and
is ensure
insured
levels
being
tooshortest
high. time.”
repaired
in the
At
coast, flooding
may occur
duetold
to us:
Thethe
Association
of British
Insurers
high
atthat
highinsurance
tides or even
whenon
“It iswater
worthlevels
noting
is based
the tide
is lower
due to atmospheric
surges,
principle
of indemnity,
not betterment.
as
happened
in 1953
east coast
of the
Insurance
is there
toon
putthe
people
back in
England.
On topthey
of the
high
same situation
were
in water
beforelevels,
flooding
waves
can reach
several
metres the
in height,
took place,
and not
to improve
build of
leading
to intermittent
flows
over defences;
the customer’s
home. The
insurance
industry
if
these cause
erosion
of embankments,
it can
regularly
provides
information
to customers
lead
to collapses
and
inrush
of flood water.
at flood
risk about
theantype
of property
level
Typically,
systems
designed
to deal
protectionsuch
measures
thatare
they
may want
to
with
floodinrisks
that
might
occur
in a
consider
which
could
limit
the once
damage
hundred
or more.
Climate
changes of
are
caused byyears
a flood,
or reduce
the chances
now
to be increasing
sea level heights
floodknown
water entering
the property.
and
also awind
speeds,property
thereforehas
increasing
“After
customer’s
flooded,
these
risks.are taking place, insurers
when flood
the repairs
Flooding
from rivers
will
often discuss
withand
the other
customer whether
watercourses
canresilient
occur where
thewould
amount
resistant and/or
repairs
be of
water
cannotSometimes
be contained
andrepairs
it overtops
appropriate.
these
may
the
Typically,
this
flooding
is managed
not banks.
cost more
than the
normal
reinstatement
so
that itand
would
occur
only
about
process
if this
is the
case
thenonce
insurers
every
seventy
years.
As measures
for coastalinflooding,
are willing
to put
these
place.
there
may behowever,
areas where
this
water
Ultimately,
this is
theexcess
customer’s
can
be stored
decision,
and temporarily
if the cost ofwithout
propertycausing
level
too
many problems,
or where
it can flow
protection
is more than
the standard
repair,
safely
There
are customer
also complicated
it will away.
be down
to the
to install and
interactions
the water that flows
pay for thesebetween
measures.
off“Insurers
the land will
and always
that which
into
the
seeksoaks
to take
account
ground.
The relative
amounts
to what
of any measures
which
can be as
shown
to have
flows
offthe
andflood
whatrisk
soaks
will depend
on
reduced
to in
a property.
These
the
andaccount
the hydrogeology,
although
willlandscape
be taken into
when insurers
are
the
way inawhich
the land
is risk,
beingand
used
is
assessing
property’s
flood
then
also
important,
with lessof
water
setting
the pricefor
or example,
policy conditions
the
coming
off forested land. Groundwater
insurance.
flooding
often occurs
a long
way from
“We support
the broad
principle
of where
there
is rainfall,
due to themeasures
movement
property
level protection
as of
water
in the
aquifers,
they can
helpground
reducethrough
the flood
damagewhich
to a
may
transport
waterenable
a longthe
way.homeowner
In 2013/14,
property
and could
for
example,
groundwater
flooding
was a
to return
to their
home earlier,
for example,
major
problem
happened
relatively
if a property
hasthat
water
resistant
plaster on
slowly,
with walls,
many people
only
experiencing
the internal
then the
time
it takes for a
aproperty
gradual to
rise
of out
groundwater
under their
dry
may be reduced.
houses
until they
were inundated.
“However,
our experience
shows that many
Groundwater
is to
especially
homeowners
areflooding
reluctant
install them
prevalent
there is
long consider
period ofthat
for a rangewhen
of reasons
– asome
rainfall
that
completely
soaks the ground,
measures
may
not be aesthetically
pleasing,
resulting
being no spare
capacity
they may in
actthere
as a constant
reminder
of a
underground
to keep
storing or
water.
also
distressing time
of flooding,
theyItmay
lasts
longittime,
and in
2014, there
thinkathat
is a clear
indicator
thatwere
their
still
areas
the southflooded
east of and
England
at
home
has of
previously
therefore
risk
of affect
this type
flooding
months
would
theof
value
of their
homeafter
in the
the
prolonged periods of rainfall had ceased.
future.”
Climate
change
is increasing
thesedeeply
flood
We find
the attitude
of insurers
risks,
notand
leastwe
aswould
rainfallurge
is increasing
–
defeatist
an incoming
with
more prolonged
periods
of wet
weather
Government
to encourage
a little
more
firmly
in
the winter
in much
of the
UK and more
insurers
to come
up with
waysthrough
which
intense,
sharper
storms
the resilience
summer. in
they could
promote
and in
drive
In towns
and cities, the drainage systems
flooded
homes.
areOne
designed
to capture
store
or drainto
mechanism
that and
has the
potential
away
any
rainfall
that
is not
for other
ensure
that
homes
at risk
ofused
flooding
become
purposes,
suchisasthe
in aintroduction
reservoir. Typically
more resilient
of Flood
these
drainage
systems
are designed
to cope
Re. Flood
Re was
developed
after floods
with
rainfall and
maxima
that occur
on average
in Somerset
the Thames
Valley,
with
once
in thirty
years.the
However,
drainage
Parliament
passing
Water these
Act 2014.
systems
areisnot
designed
cope
with very
Flood Re
designed
to to
allow
insurance
heavy
rainfall
forhome
long periods
companies
to occurring
charge every
owner
and
often
become
overloaded,
resulting
£10.75
to raise
£180
million each
year toin
flooding
of properties,
roads
and important
be put into
a pooled fund
to help
provide
infrastructure
like power
stations.
In flooding
2007,
affordable insurance
in areas
of high
for
major
treatment
risk.example,
Flood Rea is
onlywater
designed
to last plant
for 25
was
inaGloucestershire
due to a
yearsflooded
and it is
transitional arrangement
combination
of flooding
from the for
River
to a free market
pricing structure
Severn
and
localinsurance.
heavy rainfall
with the
domestic
flood
It is –
expected
to be
loss
of drinking
water
fromof
the
works
for no
introduced
in the
summer
2015
though
over
fortnight,
nearly half a
firm adate
has yetaffecting
been fixed.
million
Givingpeople.
evidence to our Inquiry, the RICS
Ascritical
well asof
not
being
was
the
fact able
that to
thecontain
schemethe
heaviest
storms,
drainage
systems
in towns
will not cover
tenants,
small
businesses
and cities
are alsoproperty,
prone toand
blockages
by
commercial
was also
13
29
28
http://www.
repairandrenewgrant.
co.uk/
29
Association of British
Insurers A guide to
resistant and resilient
repair after a flood,
Guide to https://www.
abi.org.uk/Insuranceand-savings/Topics-andissues/~/media/0837E8
F0B35147D59A92D0A72
31A572F.ashx
Living with water
26
14
debris
leaffor
fall.catchment
Increasingly,wide
towns and
The and
need
cities
are management
being planned so as to make sure
water
that where the capacity of the drainage
Julian Jones
of Water
empirical
catchment
system
can no
longer cope,
any water
on
21 (a not-for-profit
flood planning
the
surface
is
moved
away
safely
or
stored
organisation that works
methodology in 2008,
temporarily
until
rainfallthis
has
with landowners
andthe heavy
and applied
to a
communities
to develop
notional
1 inincreasing
75 year
abated.
As well
as climate
change
sustainable
storm event,
finding that
these
floodprotection
risks, a 2011 study
for Ofwat
against flood, drought,
this could be stored with
showed
that
urban
drainage
flooding
is
and public health risks
land owner agreement
also
increasing
to continual
paving
in the
community)due
gave
several times
over within
evidence
on thesurfaces
need
a very
catchment
over
of urban
for
car steep
parking
and
for catchment
Gloucestershire.
patios,
much wide
of which isinunplanned
andIf
water management.
an empirical approach
unpredictable.
This means
that where
Catchment wide
were applied to the
originally
water
soaked
into
the ground,
management plans are
development
of
an essential
plans,the
not
itseen
nowascannot
do so and catchment
runs off into
tool in increasing
only its
flood
control, but
drainage
system,water
increasing
load.
9
http://webarchive.
nationalarchives.gov.
uk/20100807034701/
http:/archive.
cabinetoffice.gov.
uk/pittreview/_/
media/assets/www.
cabinetoffice.gov.uk/
flooding_review/pitt_
review_full%20pdf.pdf
10
The Government’s
Response to Sir Michael
Pitt’s Review of the
summer 2007 Floods
Final Progress Report,
27 January 2012.
https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/
system/uploads/
attachment_data/
file/69489/2012-01-31pb13705-pitt-reviewprogress.pdf
resilience in the built
multiple objectives
environment. The aim
could be met, ranging
2.3
Recent improvements
changes
of catchment
wide
fromand
public
health, to by
plans is to reduce the
drought control, and
Government
downstream
reduced
charges.
The
pace of maximum
addressing the
issuewater
of flooding
water height of a flood
What is missing is the
picked
up in the wake ofoverarching
the devastating
(the flood peak) or to
catchment
floods
in
the
summer
of
2007,
forced
delay the arrival of the
planningwhich
and facilitation
flood peak downstream,
favourable to
Government
to examineby
itsa approach
increasing
the time
requirement.
flooding
more
widely. It regulatory
commissioned
Sir
available to prepare for
I suggest that a means
Michael
Pitt
to
conduct
an
independent
floods. These aims are
to allocate responsibility
9
review
ofby
the
way the events
were managed
achieved
restricting
for managing
rainwater .
the report
progresswas
of water
according
land
The
published
in Juneto2008
through
a catchment.
and tenure
and
contained
a detailedownership
assessment
of
This can be done by
is devised, and
what
happened
and
what
might
need
to
storing water using
appropriate practice
beand
done
differently.
It
put
forward
92
maintaining the
facilitated through the
capacity of, ponds, covering
structures
and theand
recommendations
prediction
ditches, embanked
professions,
be set in
warning
of flooding, prevention,
emergency
reservoirs, channels or
place by the Flood and
management,
resilience
and
recovery.
Many
land; and increasing soil
Water Management
ofinfiltration,
the recommendations
were
far-reaching
potentially
Act,
to be
overseen by
reducing
the local authorities
and
calledsurface
for a radical reshaping
of floodrunoff.
As well as
including public health
risk
management
practice.
aiding with flood risk
as an aspect of their
Alongside the final report,
Sir Michael’s
mitigation, such an
normal planning
team
published
an
implementation
approach provides a
obligations. and
balancedguide,
opportunity
delivery
setting outThis
whodeficit
the team felt
for addressing
water
demonstrates
the
was
responsible
for ensuring
implementation
resource pressures,
need for a long term
ofwhich
eachare
recommendation
and
the
suggested
important
strategic view by
timescale
for doing so. Government on water
as supply abstractions
are
to become moreresponse
supply,
managing our
A Government
wasaspublished
in 2008
the
catchments
andin
utilising
inconstrained
December
and the
ministers
future at the same time
our surface water
post
at the time acceptedmore
all of
the report’s
as demand for water
effectively could
recommendations
and
gave
an
undertaking
will increase. Water 21
significantly reduce (or
the UK’sthem
first in line
remove)
todevised
implement
withthis
thedeficit.
delivery
guide. Since then, progress reports have been
catalysts for
forDecember
the methods
used
published
in change
June and
2009
andto
10
design
then
inthese
2012 systems.
. Key legislation has included
“Current
design codes need to be
the
following:
substantially
to include
projected
●
The Flood updated
and Water
Management
changes
in future
rainfallfor
andbetter,
to provide
Act 2010
- providing
more
guidance
to designers
on how best
comprehensive
management
of these
flood
systems
canpeople,
be designed
for
risk for
homesand
andadapted
businesses.
both
variability.”
It current
places aand
dutyfuture
on allrainfall
flood-risk
We
also received
evidence to
outlining
the
management
authorities
co-operate
partwith
Building
Regulations
local authority
each other.
It alsoand
includes
a
building
control
could play.framework,
For example,
simplified
overarching
thewhich
representative
body fororganisations
building control
allows different
teams
in local
authorities,
LABC told
us:
to work
together
and develop
a shared
“Once
identified asofan
area
for suitable
development
understanding
the
most
andsolutions
an area with
potential
for flooding
flooding, it
to surface
water
is clear
that any construction there should
problems.
be such
that it can
offerand
resilience.
●
The National
Flood
CoastalThis
Erosion
canRisk
be achieved
by putting
appropriate
Management
Strategy
for England
requirements
intoguidance
Part C ofon
the
Building
and statutory
co-operation
Regulations,
whichinformation,
already dealspublished
with the in
and requesting
harmful
effects
ofstrategy’s
ground moisture.
At the
July 2011.
The
overall aim
is to
time
of publication
thereand
were
proposals
ensure
that flooding
coastal
erosion
to incorporate
suitable measures
into Part
risks are well-managed
and co-ordinated,
C. These
theminimised
Building
so thatamendments
their impactstoare
Regulations
wereFlood
not implemented.”
●
The National
Emergency
LABC
also pointed
out that
the2010.
recent
Framework,
published
in July
Government
review
of Housing
Standards
This provides
guidance
and advice
for 25
suggested
linking
councilsways
andof
others
on certain
planning for and
requirements
respondingidentified
to floods.at planning stage
with
ensuring
technical (Schemes
compliance
●
The
Water Industry
forusing
building
control,
and these
are now
being
Adoption
of Private
Sewers)
Regulations
implemented.
“A similar
approach
2011, transferred
private
sewerscould
that
be adopted
flood
resilience
where
areasto
connect for
to the
public
sewerage
system
identified
as requiring
special
the water
and sewerage
on 1measures
October 2011.
would
set out was
in local
plans,to
and
ensuring
Thisbetransfer
intended
provide
compliance
would
through
customers
withbe
theachieved
assurance
of having
building
control.”
In the recent
consultation
a regulated
company,
responsible
for
on SuDS
implementation
via the planning
maintaining
and repairing
sewerage
system
DCLG
states
it isproperty,
considering
system
serving
their
which
increasing
role of Building
Control
to
works tothe
minimum
standards
of service,
inspect
site works.
However,
wait tothey
hear
is overseen
by Ofwat,
and we
on whom
what
will mean
in practice.
canthis
callactually
if they have
problems.
Again, even were this implemented, while
it Witnesses
may furtherpointed
the uptake
SuDS
in new
out, of
that
despite
the
development,
it would
do nothing
increasing
flood
risks, the
problemto
is drive
not
uptake in
existing
properties.
treated
with
the same
sense of urgency as,
Making
already
prone
say,
airportbuildings
capacity in
orareas
rail. That
said,
in the
to floods
which
may
so due been
to
last
seven(or
years
there
hasbecome
undoubtedly
greater
from successive Governments
Waterfocus
scarcity
on the need to tackle flooding issues,
Over recentsevere
decades
at riskwidespread
of deficit during
following
events and
England has been
a drought by the 2020s
criticism.
affected by a drought
due to the combined
However,
Government
appears
unable
every
seven years
on
effect
of climate
change
toaverage.
consider
the of
dual issues
water supply
Security
andof
population
growth.
supply has
improved
Thein
CCRA
stress,
which
will increase
the suggests
future,
through continued
the supply-demand
and
flood risk as simply that
parts
of the water
investment by water
deficit in the 2020s could
cycle
that need
to be managed
in anegligible
holisticto 3
companies.
As a result,
range from
and
integrated
way. Future
Water,
published
significant
interruptions
billion
litres per
day, with
11 water supply
public
a central
of 1.2
into2011
, sets out principles
thatestimate
included
from drought, such
billion litres per day (7%
taking an integrated approach in terms
as those requiring the
of existing supply).
ofuse
both
water management
of standpipes,
are
Inand
their planning.
latest plans,
Yet,
2014 Water
has not
followed
rare.the
Restrictions
such Act water
companies
as hosepipe
bans and
measures
these
principles;
rather itproposed
has added
to the
constraining the level
deal with around 1.4
disintegration
of the waytoin
which water is
of abstraction are more
billion litres of deficit by
managed
in England
Wales.
common. Current
levels and2035.
Just over half of
Controversially,
Schedule
a key
element
of
abstraction are putting
their 3,
effort
focussed
on
stress on
the Management
measures toAct
improve
ofundue
the Flood
Water
natural environment.
supply, with the
2010,
is not to be implemented,
to the
Climate change is
remainder of their effort
disappointment
of
the
Commission
and the
likely to alter annual
split between reducing
consternation
of many ofconsumer
our witnesses.
and seasonal rainfall
demand or
patterns, but
the extent
limiting leakage.
Amongst
other
things, Schedule
3 provided
timing of changes
From Climate change
a and
framework
for the implementation
and
remain uncertain. Water
– is the UK preparing
ownership
of
Sustainable
Drainage
Systems
companies estimate that
for flooding and water
and
without
key barriers,
we believe,
without
action which
to prepare,
scarcity? Adaptation
nearly
half of water
Sub-Committee
Progress
will
remain.
The omission
of Schedule
3
resource zones could be
Report 2012
also means that the fundamental principle
in the point above of ensuring that everyone
should
haveofa climate
regulated
drainage
the effects
change
andsystem
urban
to
a minimum
of service,
which
creep)
resilientstandard
or resistant
to the ingress
is
by Ofwat,
and onusing
whomBuilding
they
of overseen
water cannot
be achieved
can
call if problems
arise,
will not
be met.
Regulations
unless the
owner
proposes
that
The
debatealterations
around Schedule
is carried
ongoing,
significant
should3be
and
latest
consultation,
in
out. the
Where
heGovernment
or she does so
then Building
December
only looks
set same
to create
Regulations2014,
will apply,
and the
linkmore
uncertainty.
This
is discussed
more
with planning
suggested
aboveincan
be detail
in
Section 3.3.
applied.
The LABC also argued that where housing
2.4
governance
of the
water
in a The
floodcomplicated
risk area is being
extended,
management
owners should be required to upgrade the
The
complexity
is exacerbated
existing
propertyofasflooding
well as ensuring
that
by
sheer number
bodies and
agencies
thethe
extension
is fully of
compliant
with
floodinvolved
managing
water
in the
UK, of
resisting in
measures.
This
is the
concept
which
makes taking
an integrated
approach
“consequential
improvements”
. Though
we
difficult.
number
bodies isproposal,
described
think thisThe
would
be anof
excellent
on
page 16.
think
useful to convince
include it
currently
it We
would
be it
difficult
by
of explanation,
givenconcedes,
that getting
theway
public
and as the LABC
it
different
authorities
to work
together
in
has advocated
these for
energy
efficient
consort,
was
the main obstacles
measures,
butone
no of
Government
has yet cited
for
taking anthese.
integrated approach to water
introduced
management.
fact,
during
thetocourse
of
Our view is In
that
there
needs
be greater
our
Inquiry, it was
said that
weGovernment
have the most
interconnection
between
how
disjointed
water to
management
encouragesapproach
propertyto
owners
manage
in
the world,
with
a mixture
statutory
energy
and how
they
manageofwater.
If as and
permissive
When
the rest of the
water
much effortrights.
was put
by Government
into
cycle
is included,
the water
situation
becomes even
supporting
property
management
more
complex
and disjointed,
preventing
as there
is for energy,
then considerable
aadvances
co-ordinated,
integrated
effective at
and uptake
couldand
be achieved
approach.
modest cost.
Furthermore, the Flood and Water
Management
Act 2010
also
3.6 Flood mapping
and(FWMA)
better data
requires
a Lead
Local
Flood Authority
Figures from
the
Environment
Agency(LLFA)
clearly
to
and monitor
setdevelop,
out the maintain,
number ofapply
properties
most atarisk
strategy
for local
riskpublished
management
of flooding,
whileflood
a newly
map
in
its area.
Local floodmost
risk includes
shows
the properties
at risk of flooding
surface
runoff,
groundwater
from surface
water.
However,and
we ordinary
were told
watercourses
(including
and database
ponds).
by those giving
evidencelakes
that the
There isthe
nobase
deadline
producing
local
showing
data for flooding
is alimited
strategy,
nor is there
a prescribed
and potentially
misleading,
as it isformat
based or
on
scope
the legislative
requirements
invalidbeyond
assumptions
regarding
sewer flooding
contained
and Water
and is not in
fit the
for Flood
purpose.
Management
Act. Philip Wilbourn
The RICS witness
also raised the issue of unavailability of
Environment Agency flooding data, which if
they permitted free access to would provide
home owners with more information about
risks to their homes and allow professionals
to advise homeowners based on the data.
Although many Government departments
and agencies, including Ordnance Survey,
release datasets as “free data” for commercial
re-use, the Environment Agency - which has
a separate commercial status - has resisted
such moves. Normally the agency charges
for the use of its data and imposes strict
copyright rules, which prevent its reuse.
We are pleased to see it has been
announced that this is to change, though
it is not entirely clear how much. The
Environment Agency is preparing to
release a raft of flood mapping data for
free commercial use in March26. The RICS
has subsequently told us: “The chartered
surveyor has an important role on consumer
protection but the highly restrictive
15
27
25
https://www.gov.
uk/government/
consultations/housing11
https://www.gov.
standards-reviewuk/government/
technical-consultation
26
publications/futurehttp://data.gov.uk/
water-the-governmentblog/funding-agreeds-water-strategy-forimportant-new-openengland
data-projects
Living with water
Section 3:
Opportunities and barriers
to increasing flood resilience
12
individuals
and whether
they will
allow
DCLG’s statements regarding the need for
Who
is in charge
of water
management
Much of the information
in this section is taken
from Defra https://
www.gov.uk/floodrisk-managementinformation-for-floodrisk-managementauthorities-assetowners-and-localauthorities
12
others’ surface water to flow either
capacity building within planning authorities
Defra
or countyis
councils)
through taking
across their land or dischargeauthorities
into their
welcomed, asothers,
is theincluding
consideration
of
Defra has overall national
are responsible for local flood risk
decisions on development in their
systems is not addressed, and continues
increasing the role of Building Control to
responsibility for policy on flood and management, and for developing,
area which ensure that risks are
to form
a major
obstacle. A duty
to
inspect
site works
(although
RICS
gaveand
coastal
erosion
risk management,
maintaining
and applying
a strategy
effectively
managed.
District
plus
statements
from
evidence in
that this
is largely
under
andco-operate,
provides funding
forclear
flood risk
for local
flood risk management
unitary
councilsineffectual
in coastal areas
management
authorities
through the intent
their areas
and for maintaining
a
also act of
as coastal
erosion risk
Government
to confirm
of the
current arrangements
“self-certification”).
grants to the Environment Agency
register of flood risk assets. They
management authorities.
need to co-operate as contained
within
However, we await
to hear what this actually
and local authorities.
also have lead responsibility for
the Water Act 2014, is still required.
will
mean
in
practice.
managing the risk of flooding from
Highway authorities
●
NationalofStandards
Theand
Commission
agrees
that ifarethe
role
Department
Communitieswere
and designed
surface water, groundwater
Highway
authorities
responsible
Local
Government Schedule 3 of the
ordinary watercourses.
andthen
managing
to accompany
of the SAB is tofor
beproviding
removed,
the highway
LLFA
Department of Communities and
drainage and roadside ditches, and
FWMA. The SAB was to give technical
is the most appropriate
body to provide
Local Government (DCLG) through
Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs)
must ensure that road projects do
approval,
or not, tohave
theaSuDSInternal
design.
consultation advice,
and agree
that making
Local
Planning Authorities
Drainage Boards,which
not increase
flood risk.
tothe
the
LPA, process
even with
them
statutory consultees is essential. It
keyLeft
role in
planning
to the
areLLFAs
independent public
bodies
ensure
floodasrisk
is appropriately
responsible
level
Water of
andcosts,
sewerage
companies
acting
statutory
consultees,
these for watermentions
the issues
which
must be
taken into account in the planning
management in low lying areas, also
Water and sewerage companies are
standards are just a consideration,
not
addressed, as the
existing budget for LLFAs
process. The policy on how to
play an important role in the areas
responsible for effectually draining
a requirement.
Thecan
proposedthey
planning
is currently
intended
be reduced
by of
up to
take
flood risk into account
cover (approximately
10%
areas bytomanaging
the risks
is likely
to result
in a at present),
33%
overall
18%)
for and
2015/16
be based
found inregime
the National
Planning
of England
working
in (averaging
flooding from
water
foul or from
Policy
Framework.
is also
partnership
with other
combined
sewer systems
providing
complex
andDCLG
highly
variable set
of
theauthorities
moniestoallowed
in 2014/15.
However,
responsible for Building Regulations.
actively manage and reduce the risk drainage from buildings and yards.
standards for surface water being
it will be the local planning authorities’
of flooding. They have permissive
Some water companies will not
applied
that
will
vary
between
planning
responsibility
toaccept
become
“intelligent
clients”
The Environment Agency
powers to manage water
levels
surface
water to discharge
and
ensure that into
development
proposals
Theauthorities.
Environment Agency is
within their respective
drainage
their pipe network
if it has
responsible
for taking
a strategic the idea
districts.
IDBs undertake
worksflooding
to
come
through
a soft SuDS system.
●
We strongly
supported
in the
address
issues
appropriately
in their
overview of the management of
reduce flood risk to people and
Pitt Review that in new development
design.
all sources of flooding and coastal
property and manage water levels
Duty to co-operate
the automatic
of connection
a needs. As Paul Shaffer
from
remarked:
erosion.
This includes,right
for example,
to meetto
local
Under
theCIRIA
Flood and
Water
sewer
removed, which as a
“Ever since I’ve Management
been involved
in sustainable
setting
the should
direction be
for managing
Act 2010
all risk
theconsequence
risks through strategic
Riparian owners drainage, maintenance
management
mentioned
wouldplans;
force consideration
has authorities
been an issue,
and
providing evidence and advice
If a property is adjacent to a
above have a duty to co-operate
of more sustainable options first in a
getting sustainable income for whoever is
to inform Government policy
watercourse of any description,
with each other and to share data. A
sequence.
appears
going
to do it has
anofissue.
what’s
andprescribed
support others;
working But it now
or this
passes through
or under
keybeen
theme
the Pitt But
Review
was for
that the automatic
right of connection
withrisk
themanagement
consultations
that
collaboratively
to support the
the property, you arehappening
a ‘riparian now flood
authorities
development
of risk
owner’.
should
to work
in partnership
to deliverit up
to a sewer
maymanagement
not be removed
– Riparian owners
came
out a month
or so
ago has opened
skills and capacity; and providing a
maintaining their waterways
risk management better to the
though again it is not entirelybeclear.
as a whole host flood
of options
for maintenance
framework to support local delivery.
regularly and keeping vegetation
benefit of their communities.
●The
TheAgency
mostalso
cost
effective
use
of
SuDS
to
be
had.
Within
that,
though,
there is still
has operational
and obstacles that may restrict the
comes from
early consideration
thewater clear
nofrom
certainty
as to
whereFlood
funding
would
responsibility
for managing
the
flow in
of the
the
Regional
and Coastal
riskdesign
of flooding
from main
rivers,of an integrated
bed and banks. Thisbe
includes
major
process
as part
coming
from.Committees
And in the past, local
reservoirs, estuaries and the sea,
rivers which they are adjacent to. In
and Coastal
approach to enriching the entire
urban
authorities haveEleven
beenRegional
able toFlood
undertake
as well as being a coastal erosion
practice few if any riparian owners
Committees have been established
creating
greatAsplaces,
putting
But
I don’tThese
think
are any
riskrealm,
management
authority.
part
maintain major riversmaintenance.
due to the
in England.
arethere
responsible
water
forward
asrole,
a major
easy
answers
terms
of the
maintenance
of its
strategic
overview
the opportunity,
costs and complexity
of this.
Most in for
ensuring
coherent
plans are in
Environment
Agency
haswater
published
riparian owners are unaware
of
place for identifying, communicating
seeing and
using
as a resource
questions.”
a National Flood and Coastal Risk
these duties.
and managing flood and coastal
and at the same time protecting
the
Management Strategy for England.
erosion risks across catchments and
and
3.4 Retrofittingshorelines;
SuDS for promoting efficient,
Theenvironment
strategy provides
a lotpeople
more from flood and
health risks.
Alltoof
this can beDistrict
obtained
challenges
around
delivering
information
designed
ensure
councils While there are targeted
investment
in flood
and
that
roles
of allthan
thosewhat
involved
key partners
coastal erosion risk
atthe
less
cost
is nowDistrict
spentcouncils areSuDS
in new developments,
themanagement;
greatest
in managing risk are clearly defined
in planning local flood risk
and for providing a link between
in dealing with “problem water”
and
benefits are likely
to arise from retrofitting
and understood.
management and can carry out
flood risk management authorities
will help to keep customer bills
down.
SuDS,
we
were
repeatedly
told.bodies
CIRIA
flood risk management works on
and other relevant
to develop
But
there
is Authorities
no indication of minor
how an
that
retrofitting
surface water
Lead
Local
Flood
watercourses,said
working
with
mutualthe
understanding
of flood and
Lead
Local consideration”
Flood Authorities (unitary
Lead
and
coastal erosion
risks in their areas.
“early
approach
isLocal
to beFlood Authorities
management
measure
provides:
promoted by the proposals.
●Flexibility in surface water capacity,
3.1
Government
spending
on flood to local authorities
winter 2013/14 flooding and a more consistent
Why
SuDS are
so important
mitigation measures
and long term approach to maintenance
Edwards,
Flood
opportunity
for both
in this Inquiry. The
draft
ADavid
number
of our
witnesses
stated that
investment
is required.
” are doing now with regard
and Water Manager,
Government and industry
national SuDS standards,
to sustainable drainage
flooding risks will increase unless more
The RICS agreed: “There
has to be growing
Shropshire Council,
to work together to
together with their
on new development.
money
is
invested
in
both
capital
projects
investment
in
the
infrastructure.
It’sI as
explained the importance
sustainably drain new
supporting guidance and
In Shropshire
provide
and
in maintenance
schemes.
important
a new airport
runwayasand
of SuDS
and the need of existing
development.
It included
further, local,as
guidance,
comments,
a High
for aInstitution
clear adoption
a robust and
accountable
really did
consultee, to the LPA on
The
ofand
Civil Engineers
even
Speed
2.”have the
funding mechanism.
means of maintenance
potential to nationally
appropriateness of
went
as far as saying that “the
current
The ICE also took issuethe
with
the
Key to managing future
for the future. However,
deliver development that
developer’s proposals
funding
arrangements
for
strategic
flood
risk
Environment
Agency’s
prioritisation
system
flood risk is the need
with the apparent U-turn
is, by definition, more
for the management
of
management
are not appropriate
and do not of for
flood
expenditure,
focusses
to ensure that surface
on the implementation
resilient
to defence
flooding and
surfacewhich
water on
new
water generated
by new resource
Schedule
3, this will
an
climate
The of homes,
sites.rather
Whilst than
there is
provide
the necessary
to adapt
tobe
and
on
the change.
protection
development is dealt
opportunity lost. Whilst
benefits would have been
guidance on how this
mitigate the long-term risks and uncertainties infrastructure.
with in an appropriately
some detail remained to
widespread too, with build
should be done, left to
we
face from
climate change.
” The organisation
Itmaintenance
said: “In our
view, there
needs to
be
sustainable
manner.
be resolved,
Lead Local
and
costs
the planning
system,
isSchedule
calling for
to agree
to a longsufficient
consideration
given
to the
risk ofis
3 of Government
the Flood
Flood
Authorities
such as
being reduced,
reduced
sustainable
drainage
and Water
Management
Shropshire
Council were
future flood
merely another
element
term
capital
and maintenance
programme
that flooding
indamages
strategies to safeguard
national
Act 2010 was to give us
to implement
and an increased sense
of the balanced decision
goes
beyond the proposedready
six-year
plan13. this
infrastructure,
such as roads,
rail and power
and other Unitary/ Upper
part of the Act. It would
of community wellbeing
making process.
The
ICE says:
“Maintenance
investment
is
stations.
Fundingmulti
for flood Making
maintenance
is too
Tier
Councils,
as Lead
have delivered
sustainable
through appropriate
sustainable
a Local
significant
concern. Maintenance
funding
and this design.
should be addressed
but not of
Flood Authorities,
surface water
drainage for low
use landscape
drainage a–
requirement
thewater
tools we
neededwhich
to
development
sites.
As it detriment
stands now, with
new development,
as was
for
courses
includes
flood
at the
of the capital
budget. One
successfully implement
The proposals included
the latest consultation on
proposed under Schedule
barriers and pumping stations, managing
new concept that ICE supports is that no new
just this.
within Schedule 3 could
simply amending existing
3, was going to change
grass,
trees
and
bushes
on
flood
embankments
infrastructure
should
if we
are unable
This part of the
address precisely the
planning regulations,
we be built,
the order
of development
and
and repair benefits
of floodbeing
defence
to
our current
of infrastructure
Actinspection
provided a real
referred to
willmaintain
at best continue
as we stock
site layout
and design for
structures, has been decreased from £68m in
assets.”
2008/09
to £57m
in 2012/3. The
Meanwhile,
Government has announced it is
allowing
multifunctional
useimpacts
for longof
from
climate change.”
poorly
maintained
assets
are evident from the
investing
£2.3 billion
in more
term
surface water
management.
There certainly
seem
to bethan
few 14,000
drivers flood
to
●A reduced impact of surface water in
retrofit SuDS. As the ICE said, catchment
sewersdefence
on the downstream
Flood
spendingenvironment. wide management would afford the most
●
Opportunities
to adapt
to climate
benefit.
Butofthe
complicated
landscape
of
The
following graph
and notes
are taken from the
House
Common’s
Library
Standard
change;
and
opportunities
to
engage
organisations
involved
in
water
management
Note SN/SC/5755 Flood defence spending in England, (last updated, 19 November 2014)
with
the public on visible surface water
over a catchment, combined with capital
900
management
systems.
issues and long-term maintenance are 35
800
difficult hurdles to overcome, and there
is no
700
145.0
Brian
Rogers,
representing
the
Institution
simple
answer
600
31.2
of Civil
500 Engineers said: “Catchment wide
228.4
232.6
241.3 (which
250.5many 271.2 3.5 Lack
305.2
312.3
307.2
274.9 standards
271.5
green
solutions
of coherent
technical
400infrastructure
300 comprise), especially upstream, offer
SuDS
Another recurring theme in our Inquiry
the 200
opportunity to reduce or delay runoff
has been the lack of consistent technical
280.3
274.2
258.5
317.1
361.9
364.9
260.7
269.1
300.1
343.8
from100catchments. These measures can also
standards and guidance for coherent flood
0
provide
other
benefits
such
as restoring
resilient
design.
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
habitats, enhancing biodiversity, capturing
Representing the Royal Academy of
n Additional funding for asset maintenance
carbon
and improving
waterfloods
quality. This
Engineering, Dr David Kelly, of the Centre
n Additional
funing following 2013-14
n
Revenue
type of joined-up, longer term thinking can
of Excellence in Sustainable Design, Heriotn Capital
make
a big difference to our flood resilience.
Watt University told us: “In order to improve
Notes
Figures
for 2014-15funding
are allocation,
not to spend
But12the
current
arrangements
the flood resilience of properties and to
Overall revenue funding for 2013-14 increased as a result of additional funding from government to cover incident response costs and
urgent repairs to
assets management
during the winter storms
for strategic
flood
are not
ensure that rainwater drainage systems are
3 £30 million of additional funding was allocated for 2013-14, against which £31.2 million was spent. This included both capital and revenue.
appropriate
and allocated
do notforprovide
necessary
adapted to future changes in climate, the
4 Additional funding
2015-16 (notthe
shown)
amounts to £60 million
5 Previous years will also include an element of incident management costs and repairing assets damaged during flooding
resource
to
adapt
to
and
mitigate
against
the
industry needs Government and policy
6 Funding for 2015-16 will be announced during 2014-15
Source: National Audit office analysis of figures from the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
long-term
risks and uncertainties we face
makers to provide incentives that act as
17
25
the better. It could have
put sustainable water
management at the heart
of development rather
than simply “hiding rain
under the ground as
quickly as possible” - the
approach we will continue
to see without it.
If we are serious
about the sustainable
management of flood
risk as a result of new
development, we must
have a more robust
approach than that which
is currently proposed in
Defra’s new consultation.
Schedule 3 of the Flood
and Water Management
Act would have gone a
long way to deliver just
this.
Funding (£m)
24
16
https://www.gov.uk/
government/news/£2.3billion-to-be-spent-onnew-flood-defences
13
Living with water
22
18
14
Defra, Reducing
the risks of flooding
and coastal erosion
published on 2
December, 2014.
15
Professor Richard
Ashley, Our government
consistently refuses to
see the value in water,
9 December, 2014,
Construction News.
http://www.cnplus.
co.uk/opinion/expertopinion/
20
16
https://consult.defra.
http://www.
gov.uk/water/deliveringparliament.uk/
sustainable-drainagebusiness/committees/
systems/supporting_
committees-a-z/
documents/20140912%20
commons-select/
SuDS%20consult%20
environment-food-anddoc%20finalfinal.pdf
rural-affairs-committee/
21
Pickles commons
news/report-defrastatement
performance-in-01314/
single
greatest
block
to the uptake
of SuDS
and
coastal
erosion
defences
across England
throughout.
over
a six year period, including the Somerset
This Boston
approach,
inThames
the FWMA,
Levels,
andoutlined
the Lower
that
has beenserious
discussed
by Government,
local
suffered
flooding
in winter 2013/2014
authorities
andinvestment
developers plan
for the
last
four
last
winter. The
is set
out
in
years.
There has
been much
deliberation
over
the
document
Reducing
the risks
of flooding
the implementation
of these on
requirements
and
coastal erosion, published
2 December,
14
– partly
2014
. out of fear of adding additional cost
burdens
to house
builders
– culminating
Defra says
that this
investment,
coming
in atop
plan
published
before
Christmas
on
of the
£3.2 billion
spent
between2014
whichand
will
see SuDS
implemented
through
2010
2014/15,
represents
a 9% real
term
the existing
planning
approval
rather
average
increase
compared
to thesystem,
£2.7 billion
than SuDS approval
bodies.
investment
in the previous
five years and that
Government
that has
using
thefunding
existing
it is
also the firstclaims
time there
been
planning system
committed
for sixshould
years. enable the SuDS
legislation
be introduced
quickly
However,to
Professor
Richardrelatively
Ashley has
15
to allowout
communities
in danger
of flooding
pointed
that the monies
are not
new
to start
to benefit
from
SuDS
solutions.
and,
in fact,
have been
taken
from
other flood
Elsewhere
in the UK,budgets,
in Scotland,
defence
management
withWales
the and
Northern Ireland,
SuDS
are being
vigorously
Environment
Agency
expected
to make
further
promoted.
10
% efficiency savings, and Lead Local Flood
The Commission
considered
a significant
Authorities
(LLFAs), on
average losing
18 % of
weight
of evidence around the need for the
their
budgets.
Flood
and
Water£600
Management
to be to
fully
What
is more,
million is Act
assumed
be
implemented,
and is highly
how
provided
by communities
andconcerned
local authorities
this
could be achieved,
as a funding
consequence
to
supplement
Government
over the
of the
changethat
of process
from
six
yearpotential
period. “Given
in the current
that envisaged
the FWM
to a
spending
periodwithin
up to 2015,
aroundAct,
£140
“preference
for SuDS”
where
SuDS
is deemed
million
has been
raised from
such
partnerships,
“appropriate”
, with
an approval
system
there
are serious
questions
around
adding a
delivered
viamillion
planning,
is being
proposed
further
£100
peras
year
from similar
now.20 Worryingly,
‘appropriate’
contributions
in thethe
nextterm
funding
period. This
is not
defined,
making
its effective
will
also
leave many
communities
without
implementation
questionable.
essential
protection
where they cannot raise
a veryrequired,
strong ”consensus
theThere
manywas
millions
Professor Ashley
amongst
all those
submitting
written
said.
A report
in February
2015 from
theand
crossoral evidence
over the
key
issues
its
party
Environment,
Food
and
Ruralfor
Affairs
successful
implementation.
These
key
select
committee
raised concerns
that
theissues
also recognised
thethe
long
drawn-out
lobbying
£600
million from
private
sector would
not
16
andraised
discussions
that have both delayed the
be
.
implementation
process,
andbut
allowed
the
“We support the
principle,
we have
potential outcome
lose notabout
onlythe
its clarity
repeatedly
expressedtoconcern
and effectiveness,
but potentially
provide
relatively
small amounts
of private sector
a systemsecured
that is to
not
sufficiently
robust said.
and
funding
date,
” the Committee
enforceable.
It also
is unlikely
resolve
One authority
working
in thisto
way
is Kent
some ofCouncil,
the complex
of ownership
County
whichissues
is a Lead
Local Floodand
responsibility
(and long-term
Authority.
Representatives
told maintenance),
us: “Funding
which currently
prevent
delivery.
resources
are limited,
and its
reducing.
It is very
Key issues
raised
inschemes.
the Commission
difficult
to fund
local
” (Box 3) in
relation
to SuDS
Meanwhile,
in November 2014 a report from
●The
system
must
be mandatory
not
the
National
Audit
Office
was criticaland
of the
advisory, through
system
Government,
and said the
thatplanning
that the risk
of to
ensure
for delivering
flooding
is that
risingthe
as requirement
a result of funding
cuts.
improved
surface
water
It claimed
thatsustainable
maintenance
spending
had
management
and
reducing
flood
fallen
by 6% in real
terms
over the
lastrisk
fiveis
achieved
on all
developments,
only
years
of coalition
Government,
and not
overall
for those
more
properties
as
spending
hadof
fallen
bythan
10%ten
in real
terms, when
21
now stipulates
.
the Government
one-off emergency
sum of £270m
for the
●It was clearly
understood
that ALL
2013/2014
floods had
been excluded.
However,
development
has the NAO
potential
to the
Government
claimed
had used
contribute
toInincreased
flood
risk, as
wrong
numbers.
a statement
it claimed:
nearly
50% of all
development
is the
notsix
“The
Government
prefers
to compare
as defined
by election
the planning
year“major”
period after
the 2010
with the six
system,
should
also fall
years
before.and
Thetherefore
latter includes
several
low
withinyears
the scope
the Act,
as in
originally
spending
beforeof
major
floods
2007
leadintended.
to a sharp increase.”
●
It was
also
understood
that there
a
The
NAO
report
did, however,
praiseisthe
need to separate
water and
from
Environment
Agency,surface
which builds
combined
sewerflood
systems
to reduce
manages
England’s
defences,
sayingflood
it
in existing
towns
and cities,oftoitsboth
hadrisk
improved
the cost
effectiveness
flood
capacity
in the
riskincrease
spending.
It was, said
thesewer
NAO,network,
offering
and
reduce the volume of surface
value
fortomoney.
water flowing
treatment
works
Inquiry
memberthrough
Professor
Richard Ashley
hasunnecessarily.
also been critical of the allocation of new
●SuDS
are oneout:
method
ofisdelivering
money,
pointing
“There
evidence that
surface
water
drainage,
andattention
as such are
political
‘good
news’
and media
has
an essential
and must
be
influenced
whereinfrastructure
the money is going
to, with
planned,
delivered
and managed
as such.
further
funding
for example
for the protection
●
Use ofliving
soft systems
or mixed
hard,
of
people
in the Somerset
Levels”
andcontravenes
soft systems
not change
the
which
thedoes
standard
procedures
fact that theyofare
part of set
theout
drainage
for prioritisation
spending
by the
network, and
must be funded and
Environment
Agency.
managed
as studies
other essential
infrastructure
As
numerous
and experts,
like the
as roads orthe
power.
ICE,such
are forecasting,
cost of keeping pace
●Having
an obligatory
system
foris
adoption
with
ever increasing
risks to
flooding
likely
and maintenance
SuDS
is fundamental
to increase
and we are of
also
concerned
whether
their
successful
implementation
the to
£600
million
earmarked
to be raised in
and longfunding
term hydraulic
function. The
partnership
will materialise.
current
Government
policy
fails to take
The
Committee
on Climate
Change
accountSub
of the
current confused
Adaptation
Committee
said, in itsand
uncertain
regarding
this. in
progress
reportposition
in 2012, that
investment
●Funding
forhas
long
termtomaintenance
flood
defences
helped
reduce flood risk
must behomes
secure,
thethree
system
of and
raising
to 182,000
in and
the last
years
funding
clear
improved
theequally
condition
of and
somesecure.
defences. But
●
There
a “dutyinvestment
to co-operate”
it
also
saidmust
that, ifbecurrent
plans
between
water
companies,
highway
for flood
defence
continue,
the country
will be
faced
with an increasing
risk of flooding
from
onSince
surfaces
flows) as sessions,
outlined authorities,
local authorities,
the IDB,
the (exceedance
end of our evidence
climate
The Environment
and
become more
individually
aware
of theof
landchange.
and property
owners andAgency
other
Government
has published
the
outcome
estimates
that
investment needs
increase
need
to understand
and manage
on our
relevant
stakeholders,
whichto
obliges
its autumn
consultation,
whichwater
confirms
by £20
million
above
inflation
every
year to
own
properties.
businesses
them
to allow
surface
water
to flow
the intention
toHouseholds
press aheadand
with
a planning
keep
risk levels
constant
in where
the faceland
of climate
need
be encouraged
to do more
for 71%
through
their
systems
basedtoSuDS
approval system,
despite
change
and deterioration
of flood
defence
themselves
and there
needs concern
to be more
effort
ownership,
responsibility
or topography
of respondents
expressing
that
it
17
assets
.
to
support
publicdelivered
awareness
of the
demand.
would
not abegreater
effectively
through
We
appreciate
there
canofbeconnection
no bottomless
resistance,
resilience
●
The
automatic
right
to
the planning
process.and adaptation measures.
pit in
termsunder
of spending
on106
flood
mitigation,
However,
there
are the
no measures
in place or
a sewer
Section
must
be
At the same
time,
Government
andremoved,
that is why
believe there
be
assistance
help reduce
surface water
runoff
aswe
proposed
in theneeds
FWMtoAct.
launched atofurther
consultation
to consider
a●
greater
at
householder
or individual
building
In thepublic
longerawareness
term, andand
in greater
order todebate
thethe
proposed
new role
of the LLFAs
as level,
around
the issue
of surface
water.
As a society, whereas
grass-roots incremental
approach
achieve
greater
resilience
across
statutorya consultees,
and the reduced
role
we need
to be able there
tolerate
livefor
with
some
could
especially
communities,
is and
a need
a wider
of thebe
EAtaken,
(amongst
othertaking
issuesadvantage
under of
degree
of floodingof- how
suchsurface
as seeing
moreiswater the
effectiveness
of local
use
SuDS.
appreciation
water
consultation).
This
ended
onof29
January
managed. Accepting traditional, out of
2015.
sight out of mind, approaches to drainage
The Government’s response to the first
Kent
County
Council
challenges
faced by and
local
should,
therefore,
not beon
an the
option
as
consultation
theauthorities
second consultation are
it does little to improve
self-resilience
both
lacking in detail, which
will have to be
Taken from evidence
has brought the project
of its complexity, we have
given the small number
and, actually,
is both ineffective
and
addressed
it is to be effective
in delivering
presented
by Bronwyn
forward, as it was
needed lots ofifpartners.
of properties
affected,
Buntine
(Flood Riskin the light
originally
scheduled for
As part of
undertaking
even if the
frequency of
unaffordable
of climate
reduced
flood
risk to existing
development,
Management
2035, whereas work will
a surface
flooding
was higher,
it’s
change asEngineer)
stated by Ofwat.
and
riskwater
free development
for sites
planned
and Max Tant (Flood Risk
now commence around
management plan, a
going to be a difficult
●
At the same time, SuDS
are only one
to
be developed.
Manager)
2019/2020.
partnership has been
thing for us to be able to
component
of
an
integrated
approach
In January 2014, parts
The second example
formed to help fund these
find and create a viable
of Kent
were severely
is of a local
flooding
solutions.
Weconsideration
also have
solution.
to managing
surface water.
Their
use,
From
our
of the consultations,
flooded.
Withinwith
the River
problem, affecting
Down’s
formed
communityon a number
Sustainable
drainage
together
other measures,
can turn
we
arethe
concerned
of fronts:
Medway catchment, there
Road in Folkestone. This
flood forum which enables is particularly important
surface water from a “problem”
into
●
The proposals do little
to address
were 700 properties that
is a small catchment.
effective communication
for us, given that we
anflooded.
opportunity
resource.
of who willhave
have
responsibility
were
A solutionastoa valuable
Urban creep
(incremental
withconcerns
the community.
growth
pressures
theRecent
extent ofstudies
this problem
building that
over ofby
soft
So actions
will bethe construction
across Kent,
have shown
to ensure
andand it is
can
only bethere
addressed
surfaces in urban
undertaken
by both KCC
critically
important
2020,
will be significant
waterareas,
maintenance
of SuDS,
or how
it will be
at a strategic level, and
through
the gradual
and Southern Water, we
that new development
22
shortages
in
SE
England
and
changes
funded.
requires assessment
addition of garages,
don’t know yet what the
considers surface water
in practice
are
now if thisnew
is to
●
Theislack
of technicalmanagement
expertise and
of our
flood assets
at required
conservatories,
solution
but something
early in its
a catchment
level. For Elsewhere
patios and
hard
will be
done. currently held
design
where
be counteracted.
inother
the world,
capacity
by process
local planning
example,
the in
Leigh
barrier
pavedresource
or built features)
So
what are the lessons
there
is great
opportunity
notably
Australia,
this
is
authorities
to approve
and
inspect
which protects Tonbridge
has added significant
learnt from this particular
for the inclusion of surface
recognised and innovative
approaches
sustainable drainage water
systems.
was built in 1982 and was
flows to the sewer system,
example? One is that
management with
are being
taken to make
theasmost
of all
●
Requirement
recognised
as having
as well
increased
urban
creep and otherfor SuDS
littleonly
cost. covers
a finite
capacity.
The wherever
flowsitfrom
outsideas
the
changes
in the catchment
has
forms
of water
occurs,
developments
of moreTherefore,
than 10 this
properties,
23
partnership
led by the earlier
catchment
to the system
havewhen
been significant,
become quite important
was mentioned
. In England
the
even small developments,
Environment Agency,
to which Down’s Road
and they haven’t been
for us in the way that we
fragmented arrangements
for managing
especially when aggregated
with other
with KCC, is supporting
contributes.
anticipated. We’re talking
work with our constituent
water
resources,
flooding,
supply,
sewage,
developments,
can
still
have
a significant
the Leigh barrier flood
The lack of drainage
about a catchment that
planning borough
and
alleviation
scheme, atenvironment,
capacity surface
results in
includes
houses
werewhodistrict
councils. We tryif
water quality,
impact
onthat
those
live downstream
theand
costother
of £35million.
chronic
flooding ofand
eight
builtsurface
in the 1930s,
in the
to promote themanaged.
need for
waters make
integration
water
is not sustainably
Funding will be sourced
residences. This is not
last 10 years we’ve seen a
the councils to consider
maximisation of the efficiency
and
This is true when considering
both the
from Government, but
just surface water, this is
significant change in their
this early on in their
of managing
water
properly
and cumulative
impact of
nonwillbenefits
be supported
by
from
a combined
sewer
frontindividual
yards, their gardens
design processes.
But
additional
funding from
This problem
havemajor
been paved
and they
we have no statutory
very difficult.
Hence asystem.
valuable
sourcehas
of
developments.
Kent,
Tonbridge
and
been difficult
to resolve
contribute
to the sewer of ownerships
position to ensure
multiple
benefits
to society
is not
being
●
The complexity
and
Malling, and Maidstone.
as a complete solution
system.
appropriate drainage on
exploited
and
this
is
adding
burdens
responsibilities
between
water
The effective contribution
would be extremely
Funding is limited for
new developments. We
toother
customer
could become
Authority,
from
partnersbills thatexpensive,
and because
this companies,
type of project,the
and Highways
can provide
consultation
intolerable even by 202024.
local authorities, the IDB and private
19
23
uk/publication/climatechange-is-the-ukpreparing-for-floodingand-water-scarcity-3rdprogress-report-2012/
17
response, but it’s not
mandatory.
So, the message is
that many authorities are
involved in flooding; it’s
not just KCC or the district
councils, it’s the IDBs, it’s
the sewage undertakers
etc. We are not statutorily
consulted, but we can
provide advice and try
to exert an influence on
district councils, but that
does not mean that they
necessarily consider what
we put before them.
There are different
priorities, and different
funding regimes between
partners, and this makes
it difficult to coordinate
resources. Funding
resources are limited, and
reducing. It is very difficult
to fund local schemes.
The Leigh barrier is
costing £35 million, that’s
a lot of money. But we
22
have
places like Down’s
http://www.wrse.org.
Road,
uk/ it might only be
23
eight
properties, but those
http://
people
are flooded two or
watersensitivecities.org.
three
au/ times a year, and we
24
possibly
not be(2015)
able
Greenmay
Alliance
toWater
receive
money through
efficiency
and the
the
EAof
funding
from
the
cost
living:or
how
better
water
watercompany.
stewardship could
reduce water bills.
Living with water
20
18
Adaptation Sub_
Committee Progress
Report 2014 http://
www.theccc.org.
uk/wp-content/
uploads/2014/07/Final
ASC-2014 web-version-2.
pdf
3.2 Flooding and planning
One of the greatest tools we ought to have at
our disposal in reducing the risks of floods to
homes in the future is the planning system.
But the system of mechanisms and controls
that in theory have been in place to reduce
development in high risk areas is not doing
its job, despite the National Planning Policy
Framework, including the three-tier risk
approach to flood risk assessment.
The National Planning Policy Framework
(NPPF) sets strict tests to protect people
and property from flooding, which all local
planning authorities are expected to follow.
In summary, these steps are designed to
ensure that if there are better sites in terms
of flood risk, or if a proposed development
cannot be made safe, it should not be
permitted.
To assess the flood risk, local planning
authorities are expected to undertake a
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, in order to
fully understand the flood risk in the area to
inform their Local Plan preparation. However,
they have been notoriously poor in doing so,
particularly in connection with surface water
and groundwater flooding. In areas at risk
of flooding for sites of one hectare or more,
developers undertake a site-specific flood
risk assessment to accompany applications
for planning permission.
When development is proposed in
locations where there is a risk of flooding
as alternative sites are not available (the
sequential test), local planning authorities
and developers are required to ensure
development is appropriately flood resilient
and resistant, and will not increase flood risk
overall.
However, many authorities are still without
Local Flood Risk Management Strategies and
local scrutiny of plans and actions appears to
be lacking18.
The NPPF encourages local planning
authorities and developers to reduce the
risk and impact of flooding through the use
of Sustainable Drainage Systems as part of
new developments. It also states that local
planning authorities should take advice
from the Environment Agency and other
relevant flood risk management bodies such
as Lead Local Flood Authorities and Internal
Drainage Boards. Historically, the role of
the LLFAs in relation to individual planning
applications has been at the policy level, but
not at the application level. However, if the
current DCLG intention to make LLFAs the
consultative body for water management
issues in planning applications, then this
role will clearly change and be strengthened.
This will require appropriate resourcing and
funding.
As discussed earlier, Lead Local Flood
Authorities (unitary authorities or county
councils) are responsible for managing local
flood risk, including from surface water,
ground water and ordinary watercourses, and
for preparing local flood risk management
strategies. Local planning authorities are
therefore expected to work with lead local
flood authorities to secure Local Plan
policies compatible with the local flood risk
management strategy.
However, witnesses repeatedly told us
that because of the severe pressure they are
under to encourage housing development,
local planning authorities often choose to
overlook the advice from Lead Local Flood
Authorities (which have not been statutory
consultees). Also, flood mitigation measures
laid out as a requirement for planning
permission are not always followed through,
and are not being enforced.
In their evidence, the Flood Foresight
technical team said: “There has always been
development in floodplains and this will
continue. It is important that flood risk
management does not constrict growth, but
even so the floods of 2013/14 reinforce the
Flood Foresight message that development in
floodplains must be carefully planned, with
the type of development and the buildings
themselves designed to be resilient to the
types of floods to which they are exposed
and the frequency, depth and duration
of inundation that may be expected.” For
example, in evidence, Espen ØstbyeStrøm and Justin Meredith, of Floodline
Developments showed the amphibious
houses now being built in the Netherlands
in areas of high flood risk where they are
very popular amongst dwellers. Floodline
has built a few of these homes in the UK
with more sites in the pipeline. The houses
and financial model for these schemes
is extremely interesting. Floodline says,
“We have successfully achieved planning
permissions for floating and can-float
structures in the UK, and importantly these
structures come with standard mortgage,
insurance and warranty policies.”
In 2012, the Adaptation Sub-Committee
of the Committee of Climate Change19 also
noted that development was continuing in
floodplains, although there were suggestions
that the rate had slowed.
As we discuss at length below, Government
is now proposing that Lead Local Flood
Authorities should become statutory
consultees in planning determinations.
This is certainly a welcome move, though
we would prefer to see the tougher plan
of action, as set out in Schedule 3 of the
Flood Water Management Act, to have been
adopted in full where compliance would
have been mandatory and not just guidance
(Section 3.3).
3.3 Surface water, SuDS and Schedule 3 of
the Flood and Water Management Act 2010
A key narrative of our report is the need
to take a longer term and more integrated
view of water management and ensure
our communities and infrastructure are
resilient to future climate change and
increased urbanisation. Excess water needs
to be balanced against water scarcity and
we need to learn to live with changing
weather patterns. We received a great deal
of evidence making the case for the greater
use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS)
as part of flood mitigation strategy. This was
a key recommendation in the Pitt Review.
However, we are concerned that recent
21
Government proposals could make the
adoption of SuDs even less likely to happen.
SuDS are designed to slow the rate of
surface water run-off and allow infiltration
by mimicking natural drainage in both rural
and urban areas. Slowing run-off helps
reduce the risk of flash flooding occurring
when rainwater rapidly flows into the
public sewerage and drainage systems.
SuDS solutions include above ground
“soft” landscaped features including swales,
raingardens, detention ponds and filter strips
and below ground “hard” SuDS solutions,
such as concrete soakaways and attenuation
tanks. Most SuDS solutions will feature a
combination of hard and soft features.
As CIRIA said in its evidence; “SuDS are
also considerably more flexible and adaptive
than traditional pipe, and gully drainage
and are often cheaper than traditional
drained developments. The value of SuDS is
recognised internationally and the delivery of
SuDS in the UK, to some extent, lags behind
other countries.”
And as the Landscape Institute pointed
out, because they are often involved in
integrating SuDS in green spaces, like
wetlands, parklands, or planted areas, they
can:
●create better places to live and work,
●even-out water demand and actively
manage water security,
●improve water quality,
●improve habitats, at the same time as
dealing with surface water.
The Pitt Review proposed that SuDS
should be included in new building
developments and their deployment is
a key element of the Flood and Water
Management Act 2010. Schedule 3 of the Act
called for local authorities to set up SuDS
Approval Bodies (SABs) with responsibility
for approving SuDS schemes; these bodies
would then be responsible for adopting
those schemes once a development has
been completed. Adoption was an essential
component of the Act, as it has been the
(http://www.theccc.
org.uk/tackling-climatechange/preparing-forclimate-change/)
19
Living with water
22
18
14
Defra, Reducing
the risks of flooding
and coastal erosion
published on 2
December, 2014.
15
Professor Richard
Ashley, Our government
consistently refuses to
see the value in water,
9 December, 2014,
Construction News.
http://www.cnplus.
co.uk/opinion/expertopinion/
20
16
https://consult.defra.
http://www.
gov.uk/water/deliveringparliament.uk/
sustainable-drainagebusiness/committees/
systems/supporting_
committees-a-z/
documents/20140912%20
commons-select/
SuDS%20consult%20
environment-food-anddoc%20finalfinal.pdf
rural-affairs-committee/
21
Pickles commons
news/report-defrastatement
performance-in-01314/
single
greatest
block
to the uptake
of SuDS
and
coastal
erosion
defences
across England
throughout.
over
a six year period, including the Somerset
This Boston
approach,
inThames
the FWMA,
Levels,
andoutlined
the Lower
that
has beenserious
discussed
by Government,
local
suffered
flooding
in winter 2013/2014
authorities
andinvestment
developers plan
for the
last
four
last
winter. The
is set
out
in
years.
There has
been much
deliberation
over
the
document
Reducing
the risks
of flooding
the implementation
of these on
requirements
and
coastal erosion, published
2 December,
14
– partly
2014
. out of fear of adding additional cost
burdens
to house
builders
– culminating
Defra says
that this
investment,
coming
in atop
plan
published
before
Christmas
on
of the
£3.2 billion
spent
between2014
whichand
will
see SuDS
implemented
through
2010
2014/15,
represents
a 9% real
term
the existing
planning
approval
rather
average
increase
compared
to thesystem,
£2.7 billion
than SuDS approval
bodies.
investment
in the previous
five years and that
Government
that has
using
thefunding
existing
it is
also the firstclaims
time there
been
planning system
committed
for sixshould
years. enable the SuDS
legislation
be introduced
quickly
However,to
Professor
Richardrelatively
Ashley has
15
to allowout
communities
in danger
of flooding
pointed
that the monies
are not
new
to start
to benefit
from
SuDS
solutions.
and,
in fact,
have been
taken
from
other flood
Elsewhere
in the UK,budgets,
in Scotland,
defence
management
withWales
the and
Northern Ireland,
SuDS
are being
vigorously
Environment
Agency
expected
to make
further
promoted.
10
% efficiency savings, and Lead Local Flood
The Commission
considered
a significant
Authorities
(LLFAs), on
average losing
18 % of
weight
of evidence around the need for the
their
budgets.
Flood
and
Water£600
Management
to be to
fully
What
is more,
million is Act
assumed
be
implemented,
and is highly
how
provided
by communities
andconcerned
local authorities
this
could be achieved,
as a funding
consequence
to
supplement
Government
over the
of the
changethat
of process
from
six
yearpotential
period. “Given
in the current
that envisaged
the FWM
to a
spending
periodwithin
up to 2015,
aroundAct,
£140
“preference
for SuDS”
where
SuDS
is deemed
million
has been
raised from
such
partnerships,
“appropriate”
, with
an approval
system
there
are serious
questions
around
adding a
delivered
viamillion
planning,
is being
proposed
further
£100
peras
year
from similar
now.20 Worryingly,
‘appropriate’
contributions
in thethe
nextterm
funding
period. This
is not
defined,
making
its effective
will
also
leave many
communities
without
implementation
questionable.
essential
protection
where they cannot raise
a veryrequired,
strong ”consensus
theThere
manywas
millions
Professor Ashley
amongst
all those
submitting
written
said.
A report
in February
2015 from
theand
crossoral evidence
over the
key
issues
its
party
Environment,
Food
and
Ruralfor
Affairs
successful
implementation.
These
key
select
committee
raised concerns
that
theissues
also recognised
thethe
long
drawn-out
lobbying
£600
million from
private
sector would
not
16
andraised
discussions
that have both delayed the
be
.
implementation
process,
andbut
allowed
the
“We support the
principle,
we have
potential outcome
lose notabout
onlythe
its clarity
repeatedly
expressedtoconcern
and effectiveness,
but potentially
provide
relatively
small amounts
of private sector
a systemsecured
that is to
not
sufficiently
robust said.
and
funding
date,
” the Committee
enforceable.
It also
is unlikely
resolve
One authority
working
in thisto
way
is Kent
some ofCouncil,
the complex
of ownership
County
whichissues
is a Lead
Local Floodand
responsibility
(and long-term
Authority.
Representatives
told maintenance),
us: “Funding
which currently
prevent
delivery.
resources
are limited,
and its
reducing.
It is very
Key issues
raised
inschemes.
the Commission
difficult
to fund
local
” (Box 3) in
relation
to SuDS
Meanwhile,
in November 2014 a report from
●The
system
must
be mandatory
not
the
National
Audit
Office
was criticaland
of the
advisory, through
system
Government,
and said the
thatplanning
that the risk
of to
ensure
for delivering
flooding
is that
risingthe
as requirement
a result of funding
cuts.
improved
surface
water
It claimed
thatsustainable
maintenance
spending
had
management
and
reducing
flood
fallen
by 6% in real
terms
over the
lastrisk
fiveis
achieved
on all
developments,
only
years
of coalition
Government,
and not
overall
for those
more
properties
as
spending
hadof
fallen
bythan
10%ten
in real
terms, when
21
now stipulates
.
the Government
one-off emergency
sum of £270m
for the
●It was clearly
understood
that ALL
2013/2014
floods had
been excluded.
However,
development
has the NAO
potential
to the
Government
claimed
had used
contribute
toInincreased
flood
risk, as
wrong
numbers.
a statement
it claimed:
nearly
50% of all
development
is the
notsix
“The
Government
prefers
to compare
as defined
by election
the planning
year“major”
period after
the 2010
with the six
system,
should
also fall
years
before.and
Thetherefore
latter includes
several
low
withinyears
the scope
the Act,
as in
originally
spending
beforeof
major
floods
2007
leadintended.
to a sharp increase.”
●
It was
also
understood
that there
a
The
NAO
report
did, however,
praiseisthe
need to separate
water and
from
Environment
Agency,surface
which builds
combined
sewerflood
systems
to reduce
manages
England’s
defences,
sayingflood
it
in existing
towns
and cities,oftoitsboth
hadrisk
improved
the cost
effectiveness
flood
capacity
in the
riskincrease
spending.
It was, said
thesewer
NAO,network,
offering
and
reduce the volume of surface
value
fortomoney.
water flowing
treatment
works
Inquiry
memberthrough
Professor
Richard Ashley
hasunnecessarily.
also been critical of the allocation of new
●SuDS
are oneout:
method
ofisdelivering
money,
pointing
“There
evidence that
surface
water
drainage,
andattention
as such are
political
‘good
news’
and media
has
an essential
and must
be
influenced
whereinfrastructure
the money is going
to, with
planned,
delivered
and managed
as such.
further
funding
for example
for the protection
●
Use ofliving
soft systems
or mixed
hard,
of
people
in the Somerset
Levels”
andcontravenes
soft systems
not change
the
which
thedoes
standard
procedures
fact that theyofare
part of set
theout
drainage
for prioritisation
spending
by the
network, and
must be funded and
Environment
Agency.
managed
as studies
other essential
infrastructure
As
numerous
and experts,
like the
as roads orthe
power.
ICE,such
are forecasting,
cost of keeping pace
●Having
an obligatory
system
foris
adoption
with
ever increasing
risks to
flooding
likely
and maintenance
SuDS
is fundamental
to increase
and we are of
also
concerned
whether
their
successful
implementation
the to
£600
million
earmarked
to be raised in
and longfunding
term hydraulic
function. The
partnership
will materialise.
current
Government
policy
fails to take
The
Committee
on Climate
Change
accountSub
of the
current confused
Adaptation
Committee
said, in itsand
uncertain
regarding
this. in
progress
reportposition
in 2012, that
investment
●Funding
forhas
long
termtomaintenance
flood
defences
helped
reduce flood risk
must behomes
secure,
thethree
system
of and
raising
to 182,000
in and
the last
years
funding
clear
improved
theequally
condition
of and
somesecure.
defences. But
●
There
a “dutyinvestment
to co-operate”
it
also
saidmust
that, ifbecurrent
plans
between
water
companies,
highway
for flood
defence
continue,
the country
will be
faced
with an increasing
risk of flooding
from
onSince
surfaces
flows) as sessions,
outlined authorities,
local authorities,
the IDB,
the (exceedance
end of our evidence
climate
The Environment
and
become more
individually
aware
of theof
landchange.
and property
owners andAgency
other
Government
has published
the
outcome
estimates
that
investment needs
increase
need
to understand
and manage
on our
relevant
stakeholders,
whichto
obliges
its autumn
consultation,
whichwater
confirms
by £20
million
above
inflation
every
year to
own
properties.
businesses
them
to allow
surface
water
to flow
the intention
toHouseholds
press aheadand
with
a planning
keep
risk levels
constant
in where
the faceland
of climate
need
be encouraged
to do more
for 71%
through
their
systems
basedtoSuDS
approval system,
despite
change
and deterioration
of flood
defence
themselves
and there
needs concern
to be more
effort
ownership,
responsibility
or topography
of respondents
expressing
that
it
17
assets
.
to
support
publicdelivered
awareness
of the
demand.
would
not abegreater
effectively
through
We
appreciate
there
canofbeconnection
no bottomless
resistance,
resilience
●
The
automatic
right
to
the planning
process.and adaptation measures.
pit in
termsunder
of spending
on106
flood
mitigation,
However,
there
are the
no measures
in place or
a sewer
Section
must
be
At the same
time,
Government
andremoved,
that is why
believe there
be
assistance
help reduce
surface water
runoff
aswe
proposed
in theneeds
FWMtoAct.
launched atofurther
consultation
to consider
a●
greater
at
householder
or individual
building
In thepublic
longerawareness
term, andand
in greater
order todebate
thethe
proposed
new role
of the LLFAs
as level,
around
the issue
of surface
water.
As a society, whereas
grass-roots incremental
approach
achieve
greater
resilience
across
statutorya consultees,
and the reduced
role
we need
to be able there
tolerate
livefor
with
some
could
especially
communities,
is and
a need
a wider
of thebe
EAtaken,
(amongst
othertaking
issuesadvantage
under of
degree
of floodingof- how
suchsurface
as seeing
moreiswater the
effectiveness
of local
use
SuDS.
appreciation
water
consultation).
This
ended
onof29
January
managed. Accepting traditional, out of
2015.
sight out of mind, approaches to drainage
The Government’s response to the first
Kent
County
Council
challenges
faced by and
local
should,
therefore,
not beon
an the
option
as
consultation
theauthorities
second consultation are
it does little to improve
self-resilience
both
lacking in detail, which
will have to be
Taken from evidence
has brought the project
of its complexity, we have
given the small number
and, actually,
is both ineffective
and
addressed
it is to be effective
in delivering
presented
by Bronwyn
forward, as it was
needed lots ofifpartners.
of properties
affected,
Buntine
(Flood Riskin the light
originally
scheduled for
As part of
undertaking
even if the
frequency of
unaffordable
of climate
reduced
flood
risk to existing
development,
Management
2035, whereas work will
a surface
flooding
was higher,
it’s
change asEngineer)
stated by Ofwat.
and
riskwater
free development
for sites
planned
and Max Tant (Flood Risk
now commence around
management plan, a
going to be a difficult
●
At the same time, SuDS
are only one
to
be developed.
Manager)
2019/2020.
partnership has been
thing for us to be able to
component
of
an
integrated
approach
In January 2014, parts
The second example
formed to help fund these
find and create a viable
of Kent
were severely
is of a local
flooding
solutions.
Weconsideration
also have
solution.
to managing
surface water.
Their
use,
From
our
of the consultations,
flooded.
Withinwith
the River
problem, affecting
Down’s
formed
communityon a number
Sustainable
drainage
together
other measures,
can turn
we
arethe
concerned
of fronts:
Medway catchment, there
Road in Folkestone. This
flood forum which enables is particularly important
surface water from a “problem”
into
●
The proposals do little
to address
were 700 properties that
is a small catchment.
effective communication
for us, given that we
anflooded.
opportunity
resource.
of who willhave
have
responsibility
were
A solutionastoa valuable
Urban creep
(incremental
withconcerns
the community.
growth
pressures
theRecent
extent ofstudies
this problem
building that
over ofby
soft
So actions
will bethe construction
across Kent,
have shown
to ensure
andand it is
can
only bethere
addressed
surfaces in urban
undertaken
by both KCC
critically
important
2020,
will be significant
waterareas,
maintenance
of SuDS,
or how
it will be
at a strategic level, and
through
the gradual
and Southern Water, we
that new development
22
shortages
in
SE
England
and
changes
funded.
requires assessment
addition of garages,
don’t know yet what the
considers surface water
in practice
are
now if thisnew
is to
●
Theislack
of technicalmanagement
expertise and
of our
flood assets
at required
conservatories,
solution
but something
early in its
a catchment
level. For Elsewhere
patios and
hard
will be
done. currently held
design
where
be counteracted.
inother
the world,
capacity
by process
local planning
example,
the in
Leigh
barrier
pavedresource
or built features)
So
what are the lessons
there
is great
opportunity
notably
Australia,
this
is
authorities
to approve
and
inspect
which protects Tonbridge
has added significant
learnt from this particular
for the inclusion of surface
recognised and innovative
approaches
sustainable drainage water
systems.
was built in 1982 and was
flows to the sewer system,
example? One is that
management with
are being
taken to make
theasmost
of all
●
Requirement
recognised
as having
as well
increased
urban
creep and otherfor SuDS
littleonly
cost. covers
a finite
capacity.
The wherever
flowsitfrom
outsideas
the
changes
in the catchment
has
forms
of water
occurs,
developments
of moreTherefore,
than 10 this
properties,
23
partnership
led by the earlier
catchment
to the system
havewhen
been significant,
become quite important
was mentioned
. In England
the
even small developments,
Environment Agency,
to which Down’s Road
and they haven’t been
for us in the way that we
fragmented arrangements
for managing
especially when aggregated
with other
with KCC, is supporting
contributes.
anticipated. We’re talking
work with our constituent
water
resources,
flooding,
supply,
sewage,
developments,
can
still
have
a significant
the Leigh barrier flood
The lack of drainage
about a catchment that
planning borough
and
alleviation
scheme, atenvironment,
capacity surface
results in
includes
houses
werewhodistrict
councils. We tryif
water quality,
impact
onthat
those
live downstream
theand
costother
of £35million.
chronic
flooding ofand
eight
builtsurface
in the 1930s,
in the
to promote themanaged.
need for
waters make
integration
water
is not sustainably
Funding will be sourced
residences. This is not
last 10 years we’ve seen a
the councils to consider
maximisation of the efficiency
and
This is true when considering
both the
from Government, but
just surface water, this is
significant change in their
this early on in their
of managing
water
properly
and cumulative
impact of
nonwillbenefits
be supported
by
from
a combined
sewer
frontindividual
yards, their gardens
design processes.
But
additional
funding from
This problem
havemajor
been paved
and they
we have no statutory
very difficult.
Hence asystem.
valuable
sourcehas
of
developments.
Kent,
Tonbridge
and
been difficult
to resolve
contribute
to the sewer of ownerships
position to ensure
multiple
benefits
to society
is not
being
●
The complexity
and
Malling, and Maidstone.
as a complete solution
system.
appropriate drainage on
exploited
and
this
is
adding
burdens
responsibilities
between
water
The effective contribution
would be extremely
Funding is limited for
new developments. We
toother
customer
could become
Authority,
from
partnersbills thatexpensive,
and because
this companies,
type of project,the
and Highways
can provide
consultation
intolerable even by 202024.
local authorities, the IDB and private
19
23
uk/publication/climatechange-is-the-ukpreparing-for-floodingand-water-scarcity-3rdprogress-report-2012/
17
response, but it’s not
mandatory.
So, the message is
that many authorities are
involved in flooding; it’s
not just KCC or the district
councils, it’s the IDBs, it’s
the sewage undertakers
etc. We are not statutorily
consulted, but we can
provide advice and try
to exert an influence on
district councils, but that
does not mean that they
necessarily consider what
we put before them.
There are different
priorities, and different
funding regimes between
partners, and this makes
it difficult to coordinate
resources. Funding
resources are limited, and
reducing. It is very difficult
to fund local schemes.
The Leigh barrier is
costing £35 million, that’s
a lot of money. But we
22
have
places like Down’s
http://www.wrse.org.
Road,
uk/ it might only be
23
eight
properties, but those
http://
people
are flooded two or
watersensitivecities.org.
three
au/ times a year, and we
24
possibly
not be(2015)
able
Greenmay
Alliance
toWater
receive
money through
efficiency
and the
the
EAof
funding
from
the
cost
living:or
how
better
water
watercompany.
stewardship could
reduce water bills.
Living with water
Section 3:
Opportunities and barriers
to increasing flood resilience
12
individuals
and whether
they will
allow
DCLG’s statements regarding the need for
Who
is in charge
of water
management
Much of the information
in this section is taken
from Defra https://
www.gov.uk/floodrisk-managementinformation-for-floodrisk-managementauthorities-assetowners-and-localauthorities
12
others’ surface water to flow either
capacity building within planning authorities
Defra
or countyis
councils)
through taking
across their land or dischargeauthorities
into their
welcomed, asothers,
is theincluding
consideration
of
Defra has overall national
are responsible for local flood risk
decisions on development in their
systems is not addressed, and continues
increasing the role of Building Control to
responsibility for policy on flood and management, and for developing,
area which ensure that risks are
to form
a major
obstacle. A duty
to
inspect
site works
(although
RICS
gaveand
coastal
erosion
risk management,
maintaining
and applying
a strategy
effectively
managed.
District
plus
statements
from
evidence in
that this
is largely
under
andco-operate,
provides funding
forclear
flood risk
for local
flood risk management
unitary
councilsineffectual
in coastal areas
management
authorities
through the intent
their areas
and for maintaining
a
also act of
as coastal
erosion risk
Government
to confirm
of the
current arrangements
“self-certification”).
grants to the Environment Agency
register of flood risk assets. They
management authorities.
need to co-operate as contained
within
However, we await
to hear what this actually
and local authorities.
also have lead responsibility for
the Water Act 2014, is still required.
will
mean
in
practice.
managing the risk of flooding from
Highway authorities
●
NationalofStandards
Theand
Commission
agrees
that ifarethe
role
Department
Communitieswere
and designed
surface water, groundwater
Highway
authorities
responsible
Local
Government Schedule 3 of the
ordinary watercourses.
andthen
managing
to accompany
of the SAB is tofor
beproviding
removed,
the highway
LLFA
Department of Communities and
drainage and roadside ditches, and
FWMA. The SAB was to give technical
is the most appropriate
body to provide
Local Government (DCLG) through
Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs)
must ensure that road projects do
approval,
or not, tohave
theaSuDSInternal
design.
consultation advice,
and agree
that making
Local
Planning Authorities
Drainage Boards,which
not increase
flood risk.
tothe
the
LPA, process
even with
them
statutory consultees is essential. It
keyLeft
role in
planning
to the
areLLFAs
independent public
bodies
ensure
floodasrisk
is appropriately
responsible
level
Water of
andcosts,
sewerage
companies
acting
statutory
consultees,
these for watermentions
the issues
which
must be
taken into account in the planning
management in low lying areas, also
Water and sewerage companies are
standards are just a consideration,
not
addressed, as the
existing budget for LLFAs
process. The policy on how to
play an important role in the areas
responsible for effectually draining
a requirement.
Thecan
proposedthey
planning
is currently
intended
be reduced
by of
up to
take
flood risk into account
cover (approximately
10%
areas bytomanaging
the risks
is likely
to result
in a at present),
33%
overall
18%)
for and
2015/16
be based
found inregime
the National
Planning
of England
working
in (averaging
flooding from
water
foul or from
Policy
Framework.
is also
partnership
with other
combined
sewer systems
providing
complex
andDCLG
highly
variable set
of
theauthorities
moniestoallowed
in 2014/15.
However,
responsible for Building Regulations.
actively manage and reduce the risk drainage from buildings and yards.
standards for surface water being
it will be the local planning authorities’
of flooding. They have permissive
Some water companies will not
applied
that
will
vary
between
planning
responsibility
toaccept
become
“intelligent
clients”
The Environment Agency
powers to manage water
levels
surface
water to discharge
and
ensure that into
development
proposals
Theauthorities.
Environment Agency is
within their respective
drainage
their pipe network
if it has
responsible
for taking
a strategic the idea
districts.
IDBs undertake
worksflooding
to
come
through
a soft SuDS system.
●
We strongly
supported
in the
address
issues
appropriately
in their
overview of the management of
reduce flood risk to people and
Pitt Review that in new development
design.
all sources of flooding and coastal
property and manage water levels
Duty to co-operate
the automatic
of connection
a needs. As Paul Shaffer
from
remarked:
erosion.
This includes,right
for example,
to meetto
local
Under
theCIRIA
Flood and
Water
sewer
removed, which as a
“Ever since I’ve Management
been involved
in sustainable
setting
the should
direction be
for managing
Act 2010
all risk
theconsequence
risks through strategic
Riparian owners drainage, maintenance
management
mentioned
wouldplans;
force consideration
has authorities
been an issue,
and
providing evidence and advice
If a property is adjacent to a
above have a duty to co-operate
of more sustainable options first in a
getting sustainable income for whoever is
to inform Government policy
watercourse of any description,
with each other and to share data. A
sequence.
appears
going
to do it has
anofissue.
what’s
andprescribed
support others;
working But it now
or this
passes through
or under
keybeen
theme
the Pitt But
Review
was for
that the automatic
right of connection
withrisk
themanagement
consultations
that
collaboratively
to support the
the property, you arehappening
a ‘riparian now flood
authorities
development
of risk
owner’.
should
to work
in partnership
to deliverit up
to a sewer
maymanagement
not be removed
– Riparian owners
came
out a month
or so
ago has opened
skills and capacity; and providing a
maintaining their waterways
risk management better to the
though again it is not entirelybeclear.
as a whole host flood
of options
for maintenance
framework to support local delivery.
regularly and keeping vegetation
benefit of their communities.
●The
TheAgency
mostalso
cost
effective
use
of
SuDS
to
be
had.
Within
that,
though,
there is still
has operational
and obstacles that may restrict the
comes from
early consideration
thewater clear
nofrom
certainty
as to
whereFlood
funding
would
responsibility
for managing
the
flow in
of the
the
Regional
and Coastal
riskdesign
of flooding
from main
rivers,of an integrated
bed and banks. Thisbe
includes
major
process
as part
coming
from.Committees
And in the past, local
reservoirs, estuaries and the sea,
rivers which they are adjacent to. In
and Coastal
approach to enriching the entire
urban
authorities haveEleven
beenRegional
able toFlood
undertake
as well as being a coastal erosion
practice few if any riparian owners
Committees have been established
creating
greatAsplaces,
putting
But
I don’tThese
think
are any
riskrealm,
management
authority.
part
maintain major riversmaintenance.
due to the
in England.
arethere
responsible
water
forward
asrole,
a major
easy
answers
terms
of the
maintenance
of its
strategic
overview
the opportunity,
costs and complexity
of this.
Most in for
ensuring
coherent
plans are in
Environment
Agency
haswater
published
riparian owners are unaware
of
place for identifying, communicating
seeing and
using
as a resource
questions.”
a National Flood and Coastal Risk
these duties.
and managing flood and coastal
and at the same time protecting
the
Management Strategy for England.
erosion risks across catchments and
and
3.4 Retrofittingshorelines;
SuDS for promoting efficient,
Theenvironment
strategy provides
a lotpeople
more from flood and
health risks.
Alltoof
this can beDistrict
obtained
challenges
around
delivering
information
designed
ensure
councils While there are targeted
investment
in flood
and
that
roles
of allthan
thosewhat
involved
key partners
coastal erosion risk
atthe
less
cost
is nowDistrict
spentcouncils areSuDS
in new developments,
themanagement;
greatest
in managing risk are clearly defined
in planning local flood risk
and for providing a link between
in dealing with “problem water”
and
benefits are likely
to arise from retrofitting
and understood.
management and can carry out
flood risk management authorities
will help to keep customer bills
down.
SuDS,
we
were
repeatedly
told.bodies
CIRIA
flood risk management works on
and other relevant
to develop
But
there
is Authorities
no indication of minor
how an
that
retrofitting
surface water
Lead
Local
Flood
watercourses,said
working
with
mutualthe
understanding
of flood and
Lead
Local consideration”
Flood Authorities (unitary
Lead
and
coastal erosion
risks in their areas.
“early
approach
isLocal
to beFlood Authorities
management
measure
provides:
promoted by the proposals.
●Flexibility in surface water capacity,
3.1
Government
spending
on flood to local authorities
winter 2013/14 flooding and a more consistent
Why
SuDS are
so important
mitigation measures
and long term approach to maintenance
Edwards,
Flood
opportunity
for both
in this Inquiry. The
draft
ADavid
number
of our
witnesses
stated that
investment
is required.
” are doing now with regard
and Water Manager,
Government and industry
national SuDS standards,
to sustainable drainage
flooding risks will increase unless more
The RICS agreed: “There
has to be growing
Shropshire Council,
to work together to
together with their
on new development.
money
is
invested
in
both
capital
projects
investment
in
the
infrastructure.
It’sI as
explained the importance
sustainably drain new
supporting guidance and
In Shropshire
provide
and
in maintenance
schemes.
important
a new airport
runwayasand
of SuDS
and the need of existing
development.
It included
further, local,as
guidance,
comments,
a High
for aInstitution
clear adoption
a robust and
accountable
really did
consultee, to the LPA on
The
ofand
Civil Engineers
even
Speed
2.”have the
funding mechanism.
means of maintenance
potential to nationally
appropriateness of
went
as far as saying that “the
current
The ICE also took issuethe
with
the
Key to managing future
for the future. However,
deliver development that
developer’s proposals
funding
arrangements
for
strategic
flood
risk
Environment
Agency’s
prioritisation
system
flood risk is the need
with the apparent U-turn
is, by definition, more
for the management
of
management
are not appropriate
and do not of for
flood
expenditure,
focusses
to ensure that surface
on the implementation
resilient
to defence
flooding and
surfacewhich
water on
new
water generated
by new resource
Schedule
3, this will
an
climate
The of homes,
sites.rather
Whilst than
there is
provide
the necessary
to adapt
tobe
and
on
the change.
protection
development is dealt
opportunity lost. Whilst
benefits would have been
guidance on how this
mitigate the long-term risks and uncertainties infrastructure.
with in an appropriately
some detail remained to
widespread too, with build
should be done, left to
we
face from
climate change.
” The organisation
Itmaintenance
said: “In our
view, there
needs to
be
sustainable
manner.
be resolved,
Lead Local
and
costs
the planning
system,
isSchedule
calling for
to agree
to a longsufficient
consideration
given
to the
risk ofis
3 of Government
the Flood
Flood
Authorities
such as
being reduced,
reduced
sustainable
drainage
and Water
Management
Shropshire
Council were
future flood
merely another
element
term
capital
and maintenance
programme
that flooding
indamages
strategies to safeguard
national
Act 2010 was to give us
to implement
and an increased sense
of the balanced decision
goes
beyond the proposedready
six-year
plan13. this
infrastructure,
such as roads,
rail and power
and other Unitary/ Upper
part of the Act. It would
of community wellbeing
making process.
The
ICE says:
“Maintenance
investment
is
stations.
Fundingmulti
for flood Making
maintenance
is too
Tier
Councils,
as Lead
have delivered
sustainable
through appropriate
sustainable
a Local
significant
concern. Maintenance
funding
and this design.
should be addressed
but not of
Flood Authorities,
surface water
drainage for low
use landscape
drainage a–
requirement
thewater
tools we
neededwhich
to
development
sites.
As it detriment
stands now, with
new development,
as was
for
courses
includes
flood
at the
of the capital
budget. One
successfully implement
The proposals included
the latest consultation on
proposed under Schedule
barriers and pumping stations, managing
new concept that ICE supports is that no new
just this.
within Schedule 3 could
simply amending existing
3, was going to change
grass,
trees
and
bushes
on
flood
embankments
infrastructure
should
if we
are unable
This part of the
address precisely the
planning regulations,
we be built,
the order
of development
and
and repair benefits
of floodbeing
defence
to
our current
of infrastructure
Actinspection
provided a real
referred to
willmaintain
at best continue
as we stock
site layout
and design for
structures, has been decreased from £68m in
assets.”
2008/09
to £57m
in 2012/3. The
Meanwhile,
Government has announced it is
allowing
multifunctional
useimpacts
for longof
from
climate change.”
poorly
maintained
assets
are evident from the
investing
£2.3 billion
in more
term
surface water
management.
There certainly
seem
to bethan
few 14,000
drivers flood
to
●A reduced impact of surface water in
retrofit SuDS. As the ICE said, catchment
sewersdefence
on the downstream
Flood
spendingenvironment. wide management would afford the most
●
Opportunities
to adapt
to climate
benefit.
Butofthe
complicated
landscape
of
The
following graph
and notes
are taken from the
House
Common’s
Library
Standard
change;
and
opportunities
to
engage
organisations
involved
in
water
management
Note SN/SC/5755 Flood defence spending in England, (last updated, 19 November 2014)
with
the public on visible surface water
over a catchment, combined with capital
900
management
systems.
issues and long-term maintenance are 35
800
difficult hurdles to overcome, and there
is no
700
145.0
Brian
Rogers,
representing
the
Institution
simple
answer
600
31.2
of Civil
500 Engineers said: “Catchment wide
228.4
232.6
241.3 (which
250.5many 271.2 3.5 Lack
305.2
312.3
307.2
274.9 standards
271.5
green
solutions
of coherent
technical
400infrastructure
300 comprise), especially upstream, offer
SuDS
Another recurring theme in our Inquiry
the 200
opportunity to reduce or delay runoff
has been the lack of consistent technical
280.3
274.2
258.5
317.1
361.9
364.9
260.7
269.1
300.1
343.8
from100catchments. These measures can also
standards and guidance for coherent flood
0
provide
other
benefits
such
as restoring
resilient
design.
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
habitats, enhancing biodiversity, capturing
Representing the Royal Academy of
n Additional funding for asset maintenance
carbon
and improving
waterfloods
quality. This
Engineering, Dr David Kelly, of the Centre
n Additional
funing following 2013-14
n
Revenue
type of joined-up, longer term thinking can
of Excellence in Sustainable Design, Heriotn Capital
make
a big difference to our flood resilience.
Watt University told us: “In order to improve
Notes
Figures
for 2014-15funding
are allocation,
not to spend
But12the
current
arrangements
the flood resilience of properties and to
Overall revenue funding for 2013-14 increased as a result of additional funding from government to cover incident response costs and
urgent repairs to
assets management
during the winter storms
for strategic
flood
are not
ensure that rainwater drainage systems are
3 £30 million of additional funding was allocated for 2013-14, against which £31.2 million was spent. This included both capital and revenue.
appropriate
and allocated
do notforprovide
necessary
adapted to future changes in climate, the
4 Additional funding
2015-16 (notthe
shown)
amounts to £60 million
5 Previous years will also include an element of incident management costs and repairing assets damaged during flooding
resource
to
adapt
to
and
mitigate
against
the
industry needs Government and policy
6 Funding for 2015-16 will be announced during 2014-15
Source: National Audit office analysis of figures from the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
long-term
risks and uncertainties we face
makers to provide incentives that act as
17
25
the better. It could have
put sustainable water
management at the heart
of development rather
than simply “hiding rain
under the ground as
quickly as possible” - the
approach we will continue
to see without it.
If we are serious
about the sustainable
management of flood
risk as a result of new
development, we must
have a more robust
approach than that which
is currently proposed in
Defra’s new consultation.
Schedule 3 of the Flood
and Water Management
Act would have gone a
long way to deliver just
this.
Funding (£m)
24
16
https://www.gov.uk/
government/news/£2.3billion-to-be-spent-onnew-flood-defences
13
Living with water
26
14
debris
leaffor
fall.catchment
Increasingly,wide
towns and
The and
need
cities
are management
being planned so as to make sure
water
that where the capacity of the drainage
Julian Jones
of Water
empirical
catchment
system
can no
longer cope,
any water
on
21 (a not-for-profit
flood planning
the
surface
is
moved
away
safely
or
stored
organisation that works
methodology in 2008,
temporarily
until
rainfallthis
has
with landowners
andthe heavy
and applied
to a
communities
to develop
notional
1 inincreasing
75 year
abated.
As well
as climate
change
sustainable
storm event,
finding that
these
floodprotection
risks, a 2011 study
for Ofwat
against flood, drought,
this could be stored with
showed
that
urban
drainage
flooding
is
and public health risks
land owner agreement
also
increasing
to continual
paving
in the
community)due
gave
several times
over within
evidence
on thesurfaces
need
a very
catchment
over
of urban
for
car steep
parking
and
for catchment
Gloucestershire.
patios,
much wide
of which isinunplanned
andIf
water management.
an empirical approach
unpredictable.
This means
that where
Catchment wide
were applied to the
originally
water
soaked
into
the ground,
management plans are
development
of
an essential
plans,the
not
itseen
nowascannot
do so and catchment
runs off into
tool in increasing
only its
flood
control, but
drainage
system,water
increasing
load.
9
http://webarchive.
nationalarchives.gov.
uk/20100807034701/
http:/archive.
cabinetoffice.gov.
uk/pittreview/_/
media/assets/www.
cabinetoffice.gov.uk/
flooding_review/pitt_
review_full%20pdf.pdf
10
The Government’s
Response to Sir Michael
Pitt’s Review of the
summer 2007 Floods
Final Progress Report,
27 January 2012.
https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/
system/uploads/
attachment_data/
file/69489/2012-01-31pb13705-pitt-reviewprogress.pdf
resilience in the built
multiple objectives
environment. The aim
could be met, ranging
2.3
Recent improvements
changes
of catchment
wide
fromand
public
health, to by
plans is to reduce the
drought control, and
Government
downstream
reduced
charges.
The
pace of maximum
addressing the
issuewater
of flooding
water height of a flood
What is missing is the
picked
up in the wake ofoverarching
the devastating
(the flood peak) or to
catchment
floods
in
the
summer
of
2007,
forced
delay the arrival of the
planningwhich
and facilitation
flood peak downstream,
favourable to
Government
to examineby
itsa approach
increasing
the time
requirement.
flooding
more
widely. It regulatory
commissioned
Sir
available to prepare for
I suggest that a means
Michael
Pitt
to
conduct
an
independent
floods. These aims are
to allocate responsibility
9
review
ofby
the
way the events
were managed
achieved
restricting
for managing
rainwater .
the report
progresswas
of water
according
land
The
published
in Juneto2008
through
a catchment.
and tenure
and
contained
a detailedownership
assessment
of
This can be done by
is devised, and
what
happened
and
what
might
need
to
storing water using
appropriate practice
beand
done
differently.
It
put
forward
92
maintaining the
facilitated through the
capacity of, ponds, covering
structures
and theand
recommendations
prediction
ditches, embanked
professions,
be set in
warning
of flooding, prevention,
emergency
reservoirs, channels or
place by the Flood and
management,
resilience
and
recovery.
Many
land; and increasing soil
Water Management
ofinfiltration,
the recommendations
were
far-reaching
potentially
Act,
to be
overseen by
reducing
the local authorities
and
calledsurface
for a radical reshaping
of floodrunoff.
As well as
including public health
risk
management
practice.
aiding with flood risk
as an aspect of their
Alongside the final report,
Sir Michael’s
mitigation, such an
normal planning
team
published
an
implementation
approach provides a
obligations. and
balancedguide,
opportunity
delivery
setting outThis
whodeficit
the team felt
for addressing
water
demonstrates
the
was
responsible
for ensuring
implementation
resource pressures,
need for a long term
ofwhich
eachare
recommendation
and
the
suggested
important
strategic view by
timescale
for doing so. Government on water
as supply abstractions
are
to become moreresponse
supply,
managing our
A Government
wasaspublished
in 2008
the
catchments
andin
utilising
inconstrained
December
and the
ministers
future at the same time
our surface water
post
at the time acceptedmore
all of
the report’s
as demand for water
effectively could
recommendations
and
gave
an
undertaking
will increase. Water 21
significantly reduce (or
the UK’sthem
first in line
remove)
todevised
implement
withthis
thedeficit.
delivery
guide. Since then, progress reports have been
catalysts for
forDecember
the methods
used
published
in change
June and
2009
andto
10
design
then
inthese
2012 systems.
. Key legislation has included
“Current
design codes need to be
the
following:
substantially
to include
projected
●
The Flood updated
and Water
Management
changes
in future
rainfallfor
andbetter,
to provide
Act 2010
- providing
more
guidance
to designers
on how best
comprehensive
management
of these
flood
systems
canpeople,
be designed
for
risk for
homesand
andadapted
businesses.
both
variability.”
It current
places aand
dutyfuture
on allrainfall
flood-risk
We
also received
evidence to
outlining
the
management
authorities
co-operate
partwith
Building
Regulations
local authority
each other.
It alsoand
includes
a
building
control
could play.framework,
For example,
simplified
overarching
thewhich
representative
body fororganisations
building control
allows different
teams
in local
authorities,
LABC told
us:
to work
together
and develop
a shared
“Once
identified asofan
area
for suitable
development
understanding
the
most
andsolutions
an area with
potential
for flooding
flooding, it
to surface
water
is clear
that any construction there should
problems.
be such
that it can
offerand
resilience.
●
The National
Flood
CoastalThis
Erosion
canRisk
be achieved
by putting
appropriate
Management
Strategy
for England
requirements
intoguidance
Part C ofon
the
Building
and statutory
co-operation
Regulations,
whichinformation,
already dealspublished
with the in
and requesting
harmful
effects
ofstrategy’s
ground moisture.
At the
July 2011.
The
overall aim
is to
time
of publication
thereand
were
proposals
ensure
that flooding
coastal
erosion
to incorporate
suitable measures
into Part
risks are well-managed
and co-ordinated,
C. These
theminimised
Building
so thatamendments
their impactstoare
Regulations
wereFlood
not implemented.”
●
The National
Emergency
LABC
also pointed
out that
the2010.
recent
Framework,
published
in July
Government
review
of Housing
Standards
This provides
guidance
and advice
for 25
suggested
linking
councilsways
andof
others
on certain
planning for and
requirements
respondingidentified
to floods.at planning stage
with
ensuring
technical (Schemes
compliance
●
The
Water Industry
forusing
building
control,
and these
are now
being
Adoption
of Private
Sewers)
Regulations
implemented.
“A similar
approach
2011, transferred
private
sewerscould
that
be adopted
flood
resilience
where
areasto
connect for
to the
public
sewerage
system
identified
as requiring
special
the water
and sewerage
on 1measures
October 2011.
would
set out was
in local
plans,to
and
ensuring
Thisbetransfer
intended
provide
compliance
would
through
customers
withbe
theachieved
assurance
of having
building
control.”
In the recent
consultation
a regulated
company,
responsible
for
on SuDS
implementation
via the planning
maintaining
and repairing
sewerage
system
DCLG
states
it isproperty,
considering
system
serving
their
which
increasing
role of Building
Control
to
works tothe
minimum
standards
of service,
inspect
site works.
However,
wait tothey
hear
is overseen
by Ofwat,
and we
on whom
what
will mean
in practice.
canthis
callactually
if they have
problems.
Again, even were this implemented, while
it Witnesses
may furtherpointed
the uptake
SuDS
in new
out, of
that
despite
the
development,
it would
do nothing
increasing
flood
risks, the
problemto
is drive
not
uptake in
existing
properties.
treated
with
the same
sense of urgency as,
Making
already
prone
say,
airportbuildings
capacity in
orareas
rail. That
said,
in the
to floods
which
may
so due been
to
last
seven(or
years
there
hasbecome
undoubtedly
greater
from successive Governments
Waterfocus
scarcity
on the need to tackle flooding issues,
Over recentsevere
decades
at riskwidespread
of deficit during
following
events and
England has been
a drought by the 2020s
criticism.
affected by a drought
due to the combined
However,
Government
appears
unable
every
seven years
on
effect
of climate
change
toaverage.
consider
the of
dual issues
water supply
Security
andof
population
growth.
supply has
improved
Thein
CCRA
stress,
which
will increase
the suggests
future,
through continued
the supply-demand
and
flood risk as simply that
parts
of the water
investment by water
deficit in the 2020s could
cycle
that need
to be managed
in anegligible
holisticto 3
companies.
As a result,
range from
and
integrated
way. Future
Water,
published
significant
interruptions
billion
litres per
day, with
11 water supply
public
a central
of 1.2
into2011
, sets out principles
thatestimate
included
from drought, such
billion litres per day (7%
taking an integrated approach in terms
as those requiring the
of existing supply).
ofuse
both
water management
of standpipes,
are
Inand
their planning.
latest plans,
Yet,
2014 Water
has not
followed
rare.the
Restrictions
such Act water
companies
as hosepipe
bans and
measures
these
principles;
rather itproposed
has added
to the
constraining the level
deal with around 1.4
disintegration
of the waytoin
which water is
of abstraction are more
billion litres of deficit by
managed
in England
Wales.
common. Current
levels and2035.
Just over half of
Controversially,
Schedule
a key
element
of
abstraction are putting
their 3,
effort
focussed
on
stress on
the Management
measures toAct
improve
ofundue
the Flood
Water
natural environment.
supply, with the
2010,
is not to be implemented,
to the
Climate change is
remainder of their effort
disappointment
of
the
Commission
and the
likely to alter annual
split between reducing
consternation
of many ofconsumer
our witnesses.
and seasonal rainfall
demand or
patterns, but
the extent
limiting leakage.
Amongst
other
things, Schedule
3 provided
timing of changes
From Climate change
a and
framework
for the implementation
and
remain uncertain. Water
– is the UK preparing
ownership
of
Sustainable
Drainage
Systems
companies estimate that
for flooding and water
and
without
key barriers,
we believe,
without
action which
to prepare,
scarcity? Adaptation
nearly
half of water
Sub-Committee
Progress
will
remain.
The omission
of Schedule
3
resource zones could be
Report 2012
also means that the fundamental principle
in the point above of ensuring that everyone
should
haveofa climate
regulated
drainage
the effects
change
andsystem
urban
to
a minimum
of service,
which
creep)
resilientstandard
or resistant
to the ingress
is
by Ofwat,
and onusing
whomBuilding
they
of overseen
water cannot
be achieved
can
call if problems
arise,
will not
be met.
Regulations
unless the
owner
proposes
that
The
debatealterations
around Schedule
is carried
ongoing,
significant
should3be
and
latest
consultation,
in
out. the
Where
heGovernment
or she does so
then Building
December
only looks
set same
to create
Regulations2014,
will apply,
and the
linkmore
uncertainty.
This
is discussed
more
with planning
suggested
aboveincan
be detail
in
Section 3.3.
applied.
The LABC also argued that where housing
2.4
governance
of the
water
in a The
floodcomplicated
risk area is being
extended,
management
owners should be required to upgrade the
The
complexity
is exacerbated
existing
propertyofasflooding
well as ensuring
that
by
sheer number
bodies and
agencies
thethe
extension
is fully of
compliant
with
floodinvolved
managing
water
in the
UK, of
resisting in
measures.
This
is the
concept
which
makes taking
an integrated
approach
“consequential
improvements”
. Though
we
difficult.
number
bodies isproposal,
described
think thisThe
would
be anof
excellent
on
page 16.
think
useful to convince
include it
currently
it We
would
be it
difficult
by
of explanation,
givenconcedes,
that getting
theway
public
and as the LABC
it
different
authorities
to work
together
in
has advocated
these for
energy
efficient
consort,
was
the main obstacles
measures,
butone
no of
Government
has yet cited
for
taking anthese.
integrated approach to water
introduced
management.
fact,
during
thetocourse
of
Our view is In
that
there
needs
be greater
our
Inquiry, it was
said that
weGovernment
have the most
interconnection
between
how
disjointed
water to
management
encouragesapproach
propertyto
owners
manage
in
the world,
with
a mixture
statutory
energy
and how
they
manageofwater.
If as and
permissive
When
the rest of the
water
much effortrights.
was put
by Government
into
cycle
is included,
the water
situation
becomes even
supporting
property
management
more
complex
and disjointed,
preventing
as there
is for energy,
then considerable
aadvances
co-ordinated,
integrated
effective at
and uptake
couldand
be achieved
approach.
modest cost.
Furthermore, the Flood and Water
Management
Act 2010
also
3.6 Flood mapping
and(FWMA)
better data
requires
a Lead
Local
Flood Authority
Figures from
the
Environment
Agency(LLFA)
clearly
to
and monitor
setdevelop,
out the maintain,
number ofapply
properties
most atarisk
strategy
for local
riskpublished
management
of flooding,
whileflood
a newly
map
in
its area.
Local floodmost
risk includes
shows
the properties
at risk of flooding
surface
runoff,
groundwater
from surface
water.
However,and
we ordinary
were told
watercourses
(including
and database
ponds).
by those giving
evidencelakes
that the
There isthe
nobase
deadline
producing
local
showing
data for flooding
is alimited
strategy,
nor is there
a prescribed
and potentially
misleading,
as it isformat
based or
on
scope
the legislative
requirements
invalidbeyond
assumptions
regarding
sewer flooding
contained
and Water
and is not in
fit the
for Flood
purpose.
Management
Act. Philip Wilbourn
The RICS witness
also raised the issue of unavailability of
Environment Agency flooding data, which if
they permitted free access to would provide
home owners with more information about
risks to their homes and allow professionals
to advise homeowners based on the data.
Although many Government departments
and agencies, including Ordnance Survey,
release datasets as “free data” for commercial
re-use, the Environment Agency - which has
a separate commercial status - has resisted
such moves. Normally the agency charges
for the use of its data and imposes strict
copyright rules, which prevent its reuse.
We are pleased to see it has been
announced that this is to change, though
it is not entirely clear how much. The
Environment Agency is preparing to
release a raft of flood mapping data for
free commercial use in March26. The RICS
has subsequently told us: “The chartered
surveyor has an important role on consumer
protection but the highly restrictive
15
27
25
https://www.gov.
uk/government/
consultations/housing11
https://www.gov.
standards-reviewuk/government/
technical-consultation
26
publications/futurehttp://data.gov.uk/
water-the-governmentblog/funding-agreeds-water-strategy-forimportant-new-openengland
data-projects
Living with water
28
12
uk/publication/climatechange-is-the-ukpreparing-for-floodingand-water-scarcity-3rdprogressreport
27
copyright
thehow
Environment
Agency needs
moment and
withits
local
authoritieshas
and
the
urban
areasofand
they are planned,
flooding
management
advanced
prevents
anythe
useneed
of the
forexceedance
commercial
Environmentsince
Agency
trying
to develop
to
recognise
fordata
these
significantly
2008.
Natural
flood
gain. Having this
restriction
lifted“blue
would be
solutions. Places
Leicester
got
management
measures,
including
management
andlike
working
withhave
natural
of enormous
help
to thewater
consumer.
Thewhere
devil processes
river flooding
problems,
they’ve
also
routes”
passing
surface
to places
are part
of the but
solution
to our
is inimpact
the detail.
We wait This
to seemay
what
is being
got substantial
surface
problems, and
the
is negligible.
involve
future
river, surface
andwater
groundwater
published.”kerb heights and subtle alterations flooding
the reason
they’re struggling
is because
the
modifying
problems,
but only when
combined
situationand
currently
certainly
two sources
of hazard
are not
equally well
to“The
road cambers
grassy is
areas
to ensure
with
engineered
defences
in integrated
ludicrous.
We are
understood.
if you’re
with a
the
water flows
theconcerned
right way.that the
portfolios
ofAnd
structural
anddealing
non-structural
consumer
isflooding
being poorly
advised
the
flooding problem, you need to make sure you
Managing
and water
onat
the
measures.”
momentwill
andbecome
that much
more work
can be
deal
with
theussources
of the flooding. So
surface
a complex
interplay
The
ICEall
told
in its submission:
done to ensure
make
informed
we should invest
getinfrastructure
to understand this
between
how wethat
lay they
out our
urban
areas,
“Catchment
wideand
green
choiceswe
when
their
homes.”
hazard better.”
where
buildbuying
and how
weown
adapt
our
solutions,
especially upstream - offer the
However,
another
concern
was
the
existing
areas.
Not all
of those
responsible
opportunity to reduce or delay runoff from
accuracy
ofinvolved
data more
which
3.7 Insurance
issues
for
getting
in generally,
this process
yet has
catchments.
These
measures can also provide
repercussions
forrole
spatial
planning
and
the to many
One ofother
the most
concerning
flood
understand
their
or the
need for
them
benefits
such as aspects
creatingof
and
viabilitydoing
of development.
Spatial
planning
is
mitigationhabitats,
we considered
wasbiodiversity,
insurance change
things “the way
we have
always
restoring
enhancing
seen as
a keythere
aspect
managing
flood risk
particularly
the practice
in which
insurance
done”
. Thus,
isof
a need
to reconsider
capturing
carbon,
reducing
sedimentation
in a number
ways:
through
general
land
claims
pay to cover
cost ofItreinstating
the
how
we plan of
and
layout
our urban
areas.
and
improving
waterthe
quality.
can also help
useaddition,
planningthe
in interplay
determining
largerupland
scale land to
flood-damaged
propertywater
to itsresources,
state before
In
between
preserve and manage
issues,
and land
allocations;
flooding, andimportant
therefore in
theareas
restored
property
management of
catchments
and
downstream increasingly
where
there
at the development
level, for
ensuring
that
is no
moresupply
protected
to stopThis
the same
impacts
is well understood
and
there are
are
water
pressures.
type of
all new build mitigates
own areas
flood better
risk
problem
happening
again. can make a
opportunities
to protectitsurban
joined
up,from
longer-term
thinking
andfor
any
potential
downstreamorimpacts;
Adaptation
Sub-Committee’s
by,
example,
reforestation
changes in
bigThe
difference
to our
flood resilience.”progress
27
and throughpractices.
regeneration
and projectapproach
based
report
found
that
there
is considerable
agricultural
An integrated
However,
what
also
became
increasingly
initiatives
to retrofit SuDS
or plan
specific
scope to cost
reduce
flood was
to
flood management
is required
across
apparent
fromeffectively
the submitted
evidence
flood alleviation
measures.
losses
by households
propertycatchments
at a variety
of spatial scales.
that
there
are still toofitting
many barriers
to the
Witnesses
up this
the need
to map
levelup
measures,
such asapproaches
flood gates–and
air
The
need toflagged
reinforce
integrated
take
of landscaped
which
out data problems
with surface
water
brick covers.
It found
that theSystems
historic pace
approach
was madebetter
continually
throughout
include
Sustainable
Drainage
and Inquiry.
claimedFor
fewexample,
of the models
being used
of fitting
measures
would
to
our
the evidence
(SuDS)
–such
not least
because
of a need
lack of
to assess and
this hazard
taketechnical
explicit
increase by a factor
ofof
20ownership
in order toand
reach
submitted
by map
the Flood
Foresight
understanding,
a lack
account
of the impact
of below-ground
support
all the appropriate
households
team
explained:
“Our understanding
of
aand
lack
of maintenance
funding, and
too
drainageprocesses
systems.associated
The financial
squeeze
by 2035.
Yet, wewater
heardmanagement
from witnesses
natural
with
inland on
many
different
bodies
local authorities makes the most up to date
that, after floods, homes are refurbished
and accurate modelling systems unaffordable. without including any additional flood
Source of flood
The sea and
From rivers and
From direct rainfall Groundwater
Will McCann of Arup
said: “Every single
resilient measures, even in high
risk areas.
coastal erosion
watercourses
Primary Source
city and urban area in this country now has
Stephen Garvin of BRE showed us how much
Source water
Sea
level rise,
Burst
and
Exceeding
Heavy
aPrimary
set of surface
hazard
maps which
arebanksknowledge
there is about how
bestrainfall
to doand
this
surges, waves
overtopping
capacity of
aquifer flows
made using quite simplified assumptions
and how recent
advances
in
technology
now
drainage system
about surface water. And when you actually
make fitting resistance measures much more
Impact
in rural in detail,
At the
coast - that
loss they
Inundation of
AsIn
forApril
rivers 2014
and theMay
be extensive
look
at them
it shows
affordable.
Government
areas
or inundation of
agricultural and
watercourses
remote from
are
simplifications and
the situation can
be
introduced
a £5000 grant forand
homeowners
productive land/
non-productive
where the rain
rather different. Now
that information land,
is in towns
whose
The
non-productive
and property had been flooded.
occurred
used by spatial planners to inform the spatial
scheme will close at the end of March 2015,
villages
planning process, to decide where to put
but we understand that its uptake has been
Impact in towns
At the coast –
Major devastation
Anywhere is at risk
Mainly occurs
housing
and
decide
where
the
high
hazard
low28.
and cities
inundation and
due to inundation
(we are all in the
where there are
areas are, so it is important
that that process
produce
guidanceaquifers
to educate
loss of property/
adjacent to & Insurers
rain
catchment),
spreading out
from
especially
our
is informed by goodassets
information.
homeowners
on increasing
resilience of
watercourses
houses
“I also think there’s a big problem at the
their homes
and point out that it will reduce
and
authorities
propagate
integrated
premiums.
The to
ABI
says thatan
insurers
are
approach
water and
flood that
management.
willing to to
undertake
repairs
increase
resilience as long as they are cost neutral29.
2.2
Sources
flooding told us: “There is no
As one
of ourofwitnesses
Sources
flooding
are various,
as to build
incentiveoffor
insurance
companies
summarised
in the
left. has
In many
back better once
thetable
damage
been areas
done,
more
than
oneisofno
these
types can
at the
because
there
guarantee
thatoccur
they’re
same
for example,
river
flooding
going time
to getwith,
the premiums
back
over
the next
from
burst banks happening at the same
few years.”
time
as local
heavy rainfall,
causing flooding
Andrew
Wescott
of the Institution
of Civil
in
the streets.
There are
also important
Engineers
concurred,
saying:
“You might say
interactions
between
coasts
and
to insurers that
if theyrivers,
pay for
betterment
it’s
how
towns
and
cities drain
waterbut
away.
goingour
to save
the
problem
next time,
they
In
the look
2007atfloods,
for instance,
flooding
won’t
that because
that householder
occurred
in cities
likenext
Sheffield,
could change
insurer
week.as the street
drainage
system
could not drain
water
intoare
“Insurers
are businesses
and what
they
the
streams
rivers,that
duethe
to the
riverget
water
trying
to do and
is ensure
insured
levels
being
tooshortest
high. time.”
repaired
in the
At
coast, flooding
may occur
duetold
to us:
Thethe
Association
of British
Insurers
high
atthat
highinsurance
tides or even
whenon
“It iswater
worthlevels
noting
is based
the tide
is lower
due to atmospheric
surges,
principle
of indemnity,
not betterment.
as
happened
in 1953
east coast
of the
Insurance
is there
toon
putthe
people
back in
England.
On topthey
of the
high
same situation
were
in water
beforelevels,
flooding
waves
can reach
several
metres the
in height,
took place,
and not
to improve
build of
leading
to intermittent
flows
over defences;
the customer’s
home. The
insurance
industry
if
these cause
erosion
of embankments,
it can
regularly
provides
information
to customers
lead
to collapses
and
inrush
of flood water.
at flood
risk about
theantype
of property
level
Typically,
systems
designed
to deal
protectionsuch
measures
thatare
they
may want
to
with
floodinrisks
that
might
occur
in a
consider
which
could
limit
the once
damage
hundred
or more.
Climate
changes of
are
caused byyears
a flood,
or reduce
the chances
now
to be increasing
sea level heights
floodknown
water entering
the property.
and
also awind
speeds,property
thereforehas
increasing
“After
customer’s
flooded,
these
risks.are taking place, insurers
when flood
the repairs
Flooding
from rivers
will
often discuss
withand
the other
customer whether
watercourses
canresilient
occur where
thewould
amount
resistant and/or
repairs
be of
water
cannotSometimes
be contained
andrepairs
it overtops
appropriate.
these
may
the
Typically,
this
flooding
is managed
not banks.
cost more
than the
normal
reinstatement
so
that itand
would
occur
only
about
process
if this
is the
case
thenonce
insurers
every
seventy
years.
As measures
for coastalinflooding,
are willing
to put
these
place.
there
may behowever,
areas where
this
water
Ultimately,
this is
theexcess
customer’s
can
be stored
decision,
and temporarily
if the cost ofwithout
propertycausing
level
too
many problems,
or where
it can flow
protection
is more than
the standard
repair,
safely
There
are customer
also complicated
it will away.
be down
to the
to install and
interactions
the water that flows
pay for thesebetween
measures.
off“Insurers
the land will
and always
that which
into
the
seeksoaks
to take
account
ground.
The relative
amounts
to what
of any measures
which
can be as
shown
to have
flows
offthe
andflood
whatrisk
soaks
will depend
on
reduced
to in
a property.
These
the
andaccount
the hydrogeology,
although
willlandscape
be taken into
when insurers
are
the
way inawhich
the land
is risk,
beingand
used
is
assessing
property’s
flood
then
also
important,
with lessof
water
setting
the pricefor
or example,
policy conditions
the
coming
off forested land. Groundwater
insurance.
flooding
often occurs
a long
way from
“We support
the broad
principle
of where
there
is rainfall,
due to themeasures
movement
property
level protection
as of
water
in the
aquifers,
they can
helpground
reducethrough
the flood
damagewhich
to a
may
transport
waterenable
a longthe
way.homeowner
In 2013/14,
property
and could
for
example,
groundwater
flooding
was a
to return
to their
home earlier,
for example,
major
problem
happened
relatively
if a property
hasthat
water
resistant
plaster on
slowly,
with walls,
many people
only
experiencing
the internal
then the
time
it takes for a
aproperty
gradual to
rise
of out
groundwater
under their
dry
may be reduced.
houses
until they
were inundated.
“However,
our experience
shows that many
Groundwater
is to
especially
homeowners
areflooding
reluctant
install them
prevalent
there is
long consider
period ofthat
for a rangewhen
of reasons
– asome
rainfall
that
completely
soaks the ground,
measures
may
not be aesthetically
pleasing,
resulting
being no spare
capacity
they may in
actthere
as a constant
reminder
of a
underground
to keep
storing or
water.
also
distressing time
of flooding,
theyItmay
lasts
longittime,
and in
2014, there
thinkathat
is a clear
indicator
thatwere
their
still
areas
the southflooded
east of and
England
at
home
has of
previously
therefore
risk
of affect
this type
flooding
months
would
theof
value
of their
homeafter
in the
the
prolonged periods of rainfall had ceased.
future.”
Climate
change
is increasing
thesedeeply
flood
We find
the attitude
of insurers
risks,
notand
leastwe
aswould
rainfallurge
is increasing
–
defeatist
an incoming
with
more prolonged
periods
of wet
weather
Government
to encourage
a little
more
firmly
in
the winter
in much
of the
UK and more
insurers
to come
up with
waysthrough
which
intense,
sharper
storms
the resilience
summer. in
they could
promote
and in
drive
In towns
and cities, the drainage systems
flooded
homes.
areOne
designed
to capture
store
or drainto
mechanism
that and
has the
potential
away
any
rainfall
that
is not
for other
ensure
that
homes
at risk
ofused
flooding
become
purposes,
suchisasthe
in aintroduction
reservoir. Typically
more resilient
of Flood
these
drainage
systems
are designed
to cope
Re. Flood
Re was
developed
after floods
with
rainfall and
maxima
that occur
on average
in Somerset
the Thames
Valley,
with
once
in thirty
years.the
However,
drainage
Parliament
passing
Water these
Act 2014.
systems
areisnot
designed
cope
with very
Flood Re
designed
to to
allow
insurance
heavy
rainfall
forhome
long periods
companies
to occurring
charge every
owner
and
often
become
overloaded,
resulting
£10.75
to raise
£180
million each
year toin
flooding
of properties,
roads
and important
be put into
a pooled fund
to help
provide
infrastructure
like power
stations.
In flooding
2007,
affordable insurance
in areas
of high
for
major
treatment
risk.example,
Flood Rea is
onlywater
designed
to last plant
for 25
was
inaGloucestershire
due to a
yearsflooded
and it is
transitional arrangement
combination
of flooding
from the for
River
to a free market
pricing structure
Severn
and
localinsurance.
heavy rainfall
with the
domestic
flood
It is –
expected
to be
loss
of drinking
water
fromof
the
works
for no
introduced
in the
summer
2015
though
over
fortnight,
nearly half a
firm adate
has yetaffecting
been fixed.
million
Givingpeople.
evidence to our Inquiry, the RICS
Ascritical
well asof
not
being
was
the
fact able
that to
thecontain
schemethe
heaviest
storms,
drainage
systems
in towns
will not cover
tenants,
small
businesses
and cities
are alsoproperty,
prone toand
blockages
by
commercial
was also
13
29
28
http://www.
repairandrenewgrant.
co.uk/
29
Association of British
Insurers A guide to
resistant and resilient
repair after a flood,
Guide to https://www.
abi.org.uk/Insuranceand-savings/Topics-andissues/~/media/0837E8
F0B35147D59A92D0A72
31A572F.ashx
Living with water
Section 2:
30
10
1
https://www.gov.uk/
government/policies/
reducing-the-threats-offlooding-and-coastalchange
2
https://www.gov.
uk/government/
publications/uk-climate30
change-risk-assessmenthttp://www.theccc.
government-report
org.uk/wp-content/
3
Stephen
Garvin, Director
uploads/2013/11/
of
Centre for Resilience,
ANNEX-to-Letter-to-RtA future
Flood Resilient
Hon-Owen-PatersonBuilt
Environment,
MP-22Nov13.pdf
31
Building
Research
Letter from
Lord
Establishment
Krebs,
Chairman
4
Future
Flooding,
April
of the
Adaptation
2004,Government
Office
Sub-Committee
to
for Science,
of Flood
Brendanpart
McCafferty,
and coastal
defence
Chief
Executive
Flood
Foresight
Re, February
2015
5
Colin
Thorne, of the
http://www.theccc.
School
of Geography,
org.uk/wp-content/
University
of Nottingham,
uploads/2015/02/2015The Geographical
02-02-Lord-Krebs-toJournal,
Vol 180, No 4
Brendan-McCaffertyDecember
2014
Flood-Re.pdf
concerned
the impact the scheme may
2.1
Scale ofabout
the problem
havewill
on property
prices.the
“How
do valuers
Few
have forgotten
devastating
properly
residential
floods
in appraise
December
2013 and assets
early inwhere
2014,
the guarantee
of flood
insurance
coverof
is a
when
rail networks
closed,
thousands
shrinking
asset?
If the homeowner
homes
were
left without
power andtypically
in some
takes of
onthe
a 25-year
mortgage
there
parts
country
residentsbut
had
to beis only
15 years left
on Flood
Re, what
evacuated
from
their homes.
Inthen?”
Bostonasked
in
Philip Wilbourn
representing
Lincolnshire
the most
serious the
tidalRICS.
surge
the Adaptation
in But
60 years
led to 300 Sub-Committee
homes flooded. on
Climate Change
pointed
outsea
in 2013
after the
Meanwhile,
a section
of the
wall in
agreement
was reached
between
Government
Dawlish,
Devon,
collapsed
and left
the
and theto
Association
of British Insurers
railway
Cornwall suspended
in mid-air.
toSerious
set up Flood
Re30can
that
without
a clear
flooding
happen
at any
time
transitionary
framework
agreedproblems
at the outset,
and
is one of the
most difficult
there isusthe
that difficult
decisions
facing
as risk
a nation.
In December
2013,to
reducewas,
thefor
benefit
of Flood
Re toacross
high risk
there
instance
flooding
households
and insurers
will be
continually
southern
England,
stretching
through
postponed
by the government
the day.
Dorset,
Hampshire,
Surrey andof
Kent,
and The
Committee
pointed
out
that
unless50,000
Flood
extensive
power
cuts,
with
around
Re provided
incentives
for power
improving
flood
homes
remaining
without
through
resilience
it will
provide
pretty poor
value for
the
Christmas
period.
Flooding
impacts
money. into the New Year and early
continued
It has where
said: “We
currently
January
those
hit the expect
hardestthe
included
number
of households
at significant
flood
the
Somerset
Levels, which
was inundated
riskthe
to increase
overin
the
coming
for
second time
two
years.decades.
Current
investment
plans are
to
According
to Department
forinsufficient
Environment,
counter
the combination
of deterioration
in
Food
& Rural
Affairs (Defra),
more than five
existingproperties
flood defences,
rise, and the
million
are at sea
risklevel
of flooding
more
frequent
intense
rainfall
in
England,
thatand
is nearly
one
in six.patterns
There
predicted.
This
remains
the case
are
also more
than
200 homes
at despite
risk of the
recent recovery
capitalerosion
investment
complete
loss toin
coastal
in theand
next
theyears.
planned
inflation
through
20
It isincreases
possible with
that 2,000
more
could
to 2021. at
Spending
theperiod,
maintenance
of 1
become
risk overonthis
Defra says.
existing
defences
has
been
in decline.
Unless
Analysis
from the
UK
Climate
Change
Risk
transition occurs,
weindicates
can expect
more
Assessment
(CCRA)
that
the built
households towill
become
underwritten
by Flood
environment
be affected
by extreme
Re over time.
This
wouldwill
create
a growing
weather
events.
Impacts
arise
through
burden of temperatures
costs falling on
other
insurance
increased
and
changing
rainfall
2
bill payers.
The current
assessment
patterns
. Flood
risk willimpact
increase
not only
for the
policychange,
does not
take
account
of future
from
climate
but
also
as a result
of
climate projections.”
increasing
urbanisation.
In the
long-term,
most sustainable
and
The
expected
costthe
of damage
to residential
cost-effective
of and
achieving
affordable
properties
fromway
tidal
river flooding
flood insurance
is to
to rise
reduce
the
risk million
of
alone
is projected
from
£640
flooding.
Re£1.1
spreads
thebyrisk
it
at
presentFlood
to over
billion
the–2020s.
will not
reduce
it unlessthe
it is
designed
to
This
does
not consider
impact
of surface
incentivise
peopleflooding,
to do so. nor the damage
water
or sewerage
to the
Environment
Agency,
toAccording
non-domestic
buildings,
says the
Building
3
each £1 spent
on flood defence
reduces as it
Research
Establishment
. Additionally,
future damages
by damage
an average
£8. Each
points
out, “Initial
is one
cost, but
£1 invested
property-level
protection
repair
costs in
and
insurance premiums
must
typically
achieves benefits
of £5 term.
or more.
also
be considered
in the longer
There
Flood
does not
reduce
flood losses;
it
is
alsoRe
a social
aspect
to consider,
as flooding
protects
some from
the costs
flooding
causes
significant
distress
andofpotential
at the expense
of others. Overall, including
health
problems.”
the
“distributional”
or “equity”
Inadditional
2004 the Flood
Foresight report,
looking
benefits
of Flood
policy
achieves
at
the risks
to theRe,
UKthe
from
flooding
and 70
pence inerosion
benefits
perthe
£1 next
of economic
cost.
coastal
over
100 years,
This can
be improved
if Flood
Re becomes
made
assumptions
about
the implications
instrumental
in incentivising
additional
of
climate change
for long-term
flood risk.
flood
risk reduction.
In
general
terms, it suggested that by 2080
climate change is likely to increase river flood
The Adaptation
on Climate
risks
by between Sub
two Committee
and four times,
coastal
Change
called
forto
a number
measures
flood
risk
by four
10 times,ofwhile
flood
including:
damage
from urban drainage systems by
●The Flood
between
threeRe
andadministrator
30 times4. 31 could be
a roletointhis
lawInquiry,
to promote
awareness
Ingiven
evidence
a group
of
and to share
the
information
it will
14 academics
and
experts
– the technical
hold
on flood
risk with
householders,
team
engaged
in Flood
Foresight
– said
public authorities,
andvalid,
perhaps
the
thatthe
assessment
still remains
having
general
public
in the
of house
been
updated
in 2007
forcontext
Sir Michael
Pitt’s
purchasing
decisions.the
Flood
Reare
offers
Inquiry,
and if anything,
risks
even
the potential,
for the first time, for a
greater
now.
dialogue evidence
with the they
highest
Intargeted
their submitted
toldrisk
us,
households
insay
thewhether
country.the floods of
“It is
too early to
●Placewere
floodcaused
risk reduction
atchange,
the corebut
2013/14
by climate
Flood Re’s purpose.
Rather
theof
atmospheric
phenomena
that than
produced
solely
pay flood claims,
households
them
are consistent
with the
expected
underwritten
Flood Re
be
impacts
of global by
warming
on could
the Jetstream
in certain
circumstances
be
andoffered
winter and
storms.
It follows
that work must
required
to fit property-level
measures
continue
to better
understand and
predict
have flood resilient
repairs
after aand
theor
probabilities,
intensities,
durations
flood
event. The benefit
to Flood
Re’s
spatial
distributions
of UK flood
events,
finances,
and
therefore
long-term
to provide
the
science
basethe
from
which
levyand
requirement,
be substantial
to plan
implementwill
responses
that areas
over timeand
Flood
Re’s exposure to claims
appropriate
sustainable.”
wouldare
diminish.
Floods
expensive too: the economic
cost of the summer floods of 2007 was about
It also
says
that
Floodannual
Re is likely
£3.2
billion
and
average
floodto
damages
accumulate
significant
reserves, of
are
estimated
to accrue cash
to somewhere
5
which a small
be used
between
£500 proportion
million andcould
£1 billion
.
to manage 13
down
thedied.
long-term levy
Tragically,
people
requirement
through
riskthe
reduction
activity.
As Colin Thorne,
from
School of
And the Committee
called
on the also
Geography
at Nottingham
University,
Government
to set out,
in legislation,
points
out, “Flooding
is perhaps
complicated:
firstly,
a framework
the costs
and types
benefits
because
therefor
arehow
several
different
of of
floods
- river,
coastal,
surface
water
(pluvial)
Flood Re
will be
phased
out over
its proposed
and
groundwater;
and secondly,
most
20-25
year timeframe.
“Withoutbecause
this
floods
are actually
combinations
ofhigh
theserisk
commitment,
important
signals to
types.
This combination
of types,
households
will be lost, and
Flood known
Re could
as
coincident
flooding,
was
a hallmark
of on
become
a permanent
and
growing
burden
the
winter
of 2013/2014,
which featured
other
policyholders,”
it said.
sequences
and eventsFlood
In a letteroftoand
theclusters
newly appointed
involving
various combinations
of tidal,
Re chief executive
in July, Lord Krebs,
rainfall,
river and
groundwater
sources”
the Chairman
of the
Adaptation
Sub- 6.
Of the more
than 5.2the
million
homes at
Committee
reiterates
Committee’s
risk
of flooding
million
concerns
about in
theEngland,
scheme.over
The2letter
says:
are
at risk
or coastal flooding
“Flood
Re from
offersriver
the opportunity
to achieve
and
approximately
3.8 million
are at risk
a step
change in household
protection
from
surface water
flooding,
to
and resilience
measures
overaccording
its lifetime.
the
Environment
Agency.
Around
1 million
However,
the scheme
is not
currently
homes
are at
of flooding
from
both.
configured
torisk
achieve
this.” He
went
on to
Insurance
from
the 2007
surface
set out fiveclaims
ways of
designing
Flood
re to
water
floods
outnumbered
claims costs
for river
promote
flood
alleviation, reduce
and
and
sea flooding
6:1. In fact, as rain falls
improve
value forbymoney.
everywhere
in the country,
eachInsurers
and every
As the Association
of British
says:
property
at risk from
heavy
–
“There isiscurrently
no limit
torainfall
the number
even
properties
situated
onFlood
high ground,
of times
a property
within
Re can as
property
drainage
normally
to
be flooded
and stillisbe
covereddesigned
within the
cope
withFlood
storms
occur
on average
scheme.
Re that
will be
reviewed
after once
five
7
in
30 years
. changes that are considered
years
and any
Climate change
is occurring
at aand
pace
necessary
will be discussed
with
that
is steadily
these
odds.However,
We
approved
by thereducing
Secretary
of State.
were
that
commonly
Floodtold
Re is
only
designed used
to bestatements
operational
such
“5.2 million
properties
are atto
risk
for 25asyears,
and is not
the solution
theof
flooding”
- even
the Environment
Agency
UK’s rising
floodby
threat,
which requires
-Government
can be unhelpful,
as they lull
rest of on
commitment
andthe
spending
the
into a solutions.”
false sense of security
longpopulation
term ambitious
that
they
areissafe
from
This was
Our
view
that,
as itflooding.
stands, Flood
Re is
demonstrated
in Hampshire
in 2014,
where
a missed opportunity
for driving
uptake
of
groundwater
flooding
in many for
resilient repairs
after adeveloped
flood, particularly
areas
chalk land
that had
seen
flooding
thoseof
properties
subject
to not
repeat
flooding.
8
previously
. Evidence
from Heriot-Watt
In addition,
the introduction
of Flood
University,
specialists
in building
drainage,
Re could still
leave vulnerable
those
who
supported
theinsurance
understanding
that
many
cannot afford
and we
would
more
six million
properties
like tothan
see more
done to
support are
thein fact
at
risk. Local authorities used to do this,
poorest.
Nevertheless,
BRE’s paper
says:severely
“Pluvial
but
now their funding
has been
floods
arethey
the can
typeno
most
likely
to increase
reduced
longer
provide
such in
severity
as a result
of climate
change.
They
discretionary
funding.
We would
suggest
are
the most difficult
to manage”
thatalso
Government
look at this
aspect .again
In see
the what
past, more
flooding
hasbe
been
traditionally
and
could
done
for the
managed
engineering
least wellby
off,large-scale
particularly
those living in
solutions,
whereby entire towns and
tenanted properties.
communities
are protected
by hard
The Association
of British
(structural)
defences
like Re
walls,
Insurers flood
explains
Flood
embankments and at the coast, beaches
Thesand
ABI and
the But increasingly
enable insurers
tois
pass
and
dunes.
there
a
Government agreed
the flood risk element
recognised
need
to
move
away
from
flood
a Memorandum of
of home insurance
defences
to a risk-based
approach
that
aims
Understanding
(MoU)
(buildings
and
contents)
in June
on how Thisatuses
a premium
that will
for
flood2013
resilience.
a combination
develop
a not-for-with holistic
be capped
depending
oftoflood
defences
management
profit scheme - Flood
on the property’s
ofRefluvial,
coastal
and
surface
water
flood
– to allow flood
Council Tax band (see
risk,
usingtoaremain
range of measures
that can
help
insurance
below). Flood
Re will
widely affordable
and and
not
set premium rates.
reduce
the likelihood
consequences
of
available,and
whileupstream
allowing catchment
Insurers will measures
pass into
flooding
a sustainable transition
Flood Re those high
totoimprove
the resilienceflood
of land,
buildings
risk reflective pricing
risk homes they
and
infrastructure.
(A
building
that
over 25 years. The
feel unable to is
insure
not-for-profit
company
themselves..
resilient
to flood
is one that
has the ability to
– Flood in
Re such
– will allow
all home
recover
a way as Separately,
to keep functioning
insurers to pass the
insurance customers
following
a
flood.)
flood risk element of a
will pay a levy into the
Floodinsurance
risk management
canThis
be isachieved
home
policy
fund.
not an
into amoveable
fund that will
pay
additional
amount (on
with
defences
such as barriers,
any subsequent
flood
average £10.50(and
a year
passive
measures
like embankments
claim. It is designed to
on all home insurance
also
planting of grass and
trees to increase
enable high flood risk
policies) as it broadly
water
infiltration
to
soil),
emergency
households to obtain
reflects the existing
affordably priced
flood
cross-subsidy
between
management
measures
(flood
warnings
and
insurance. managementlower
andand
higher
emergency
plans)
improved
In face of the rising
flood risks. This levy,
resilience
to speed recovery
after flood
flood risk, we have
along with Flood Re’s
events
occur.
estimated
that
premium income, will
between
300,000 – evidence
be used
to cover
CIRIA provided
of the
needthe
to
500,000
exposure
thoseto
high
reflect
onflood-risk
how events, that
causefor
water
UK households would
risk homes that insurers
bestruggle
on thetosurface
in urban
areas, due to
obtain
pass into Flood Re.
limited
drainage
capacity
or
but
affordably priced flood
Floodblockages,
Re is planned
to
insurance
without
be open for
business
that
do not
causea flood damage,
should
be in
scheme like Flood
Re.
the second
half of 2015.
considered.
The public
should
be encouraged
It will provide a fund to
to see such events as “big puddles” or as
harmless water flowing along gutters and
kerbs. This exceedance drainage should be
recognised as an acceptable way of managing
water on the surface, providing it is done
in such a way as to avoid unacceptable
problems. Climate change means that
water on the surface will become more
commonplace in future and will need to
be managed carefully to avoid having to
keep building new drainage capacity at
unaffordable expense. This will need greater
cooperation between those responsible,
including the Lead Local Flood Authorities,
Highway Authorities and others.
Importantly, the way in which we lay out our
11
31
Colin Thorne, as above
British Standard on
Building Drainage BS
12056 (2000)
8
http://www.theguardian.
com/news/2014/
feb/16/weatherwatchgroundwater-flooding
6
7
Living with water
Section 4:
Concluding remarks
and recommendations
32
8
32
Abbott J., et al
(2013). Creating water
sensitive places –
scoping the potential
for Water Sensitive
Urban Design in the
UK. CIRIA publication
C724. http://www.ciria.
org/Resources/Free_
publications/Creating_
water_sens1.aspx
Despite
an of
increased
focusGovernment
on flood
As
a result
this U-turn,
now
management,
weasconsider
Englandmore
is
needs
to resolve
quickly that
as possible
missing proposals
an opportunity
detailed
for: to put in place a
sustainable
long-term strategy.
The
strategy
●
SuDS maintenance:
Ensuring
long
must
protect
homes against
the increased
term
management
and funding
for
flooding
we are likely
toissee
in the wake
of
maintenance,
which
absolutely
critical
climate
and greater
urbanisation,
if thischange
blue-green
infrastructure
is not
while
at the
same
timethat
safeguard
againstand
to fail.
We
suggest
those homes
increased
water
scarcity. to SuDS could
businesses
‘connected’
We
overwhelming
evidence
calling
be heard
charged
directly for the
maintenance
for like
a more
holistic
approach
water
a charge
from
a waterto
company.
management
canbebalance
the
impact of
The chargethat
could
on local
authority
increased
surface
run-off
with
rates and
what water
is currently
paid
to what
wateris
predicted
to befor
a water
shortage
causedbe
by
companies
surface
water should
drought.
gradually removed as SuDS are installed,
Inunless
short,itwhat
iswater
required
is a fundamental
is the
companies
which
change
in how
view
flood management,
provide
the we
SuDS
service.
from
flood defence
where
we protect
●
Reducing
loading
on public
sewers:
ourselves
to one
resilience,right
living
and
Removing
theof
automatic
to with
connect
making
spacedischarge
for waterto
and
the
opportunity
rainwater
the
public
sewers
to get
“more from
less” byunder
seeingthe
all FWMA
forms of
as originally
specified
water
as providing
multiple
benefits.
2010.
Many of these
public
sewers,
The
principles
for in
this
were explained
by
which
were built
Victorian
times, are
evidence
from CIRIA and Arup in terms of
overloaded.
“water sensitive urban design” (WSUD), a
term and approach developed in Australia
that is gaining traction in many countries
as a means of managing all aspects of
water together with the planning of urban
development and regeneration processes for
maximum societal benefit32.
Though this is by no means a new
philosophy - and to a certain extent the
UK has been working towards it - from
the evidence we heard in our Inquiry there
are huge challenges still to be overcome to
ensure that we have the administrative and
physical infrastructure in place to achieve
this.
To begin with, we have what has been
described as the most disconnected water
management system in the world. Too many
organisations have responsibility for aspects
of water and drainage, and they are under
no obligation to co-operate even where
it is essential to deliver resilience. Local
authorities are primarily in charge of surface
water, although the water companies share
some
responsibilities,
and the Environment
●
SuDS
Ensuring
Agency
is responsible
for flooding
related
that the
limit of ‘fewer
than 10 houses’
to coastal
areas
andincluded
rivers, and
they do back
for SuDS
to be
is changed
notto
always
work
together
– even
two (to
avoid
a profusion
ofthough
planning
legislation
is in place
to enforce
duty
to
applications
for nine
houses).a As
SuDS
co-operate
and
the Environment
Agency
has
have been
demonstrated
through
Defra’s
a duty
the to
FWMA
2010 to
coordinate
ownunder
research
be cheaper,
particularly
andwhere
overview
flooding
as a whole.
integrated
within
the scheme
Infrom
addition,
the ownership
of assetsthe
is
its original
masterplanning,
diffuse.
Statutory
flood risk as
management
reason
for the threshold
‘keeping the
strategies,
an obligation
under
regulatory
burden onintroduced
smaller companies
theat
Flood
and Water
Management
Act, have
a reasonable
level’
is erroneous.
yetNational
to be introduced
by needed:
many Lead
Local
●
standards
Detailing
Flood
authorities,
we werethat
told.
In addition,
how
it can be ensured
SuDS
are
there
are many
wherestandards
riparian
designed
to aexamples,
set of national
landowners
proximity
a watercourse
as part ofinthe
basis forto
new
planning
do not
discharge their maintenance
guidance.
responsibilities.
Often, this
is dueDefining
to lack
●
Resolving adoption
of SuDS:
of awareness
of the duties,
orassociated
in the case
a clear procedure
and any
of covered
they are
costs forwatercourses,
the adoptionbecause
of sites under
the
unaware
of their
existence. system, as the
proposed
planning-based
What
is such
more,a this
fragmented
approach
lack of
process
has historically
been
is mirrored
at a limitation
higher political
where,
the greatest
to thelevel
uptake
of
again,
there appears to be no Government
SuDS.
leadership and no one single department
as a whole nor for flooding across all of the
The damaging impact of this schism
has been demonstrated recently with the
long-running saga of the implementation
of Sustainable Drainage Systems, which are
seen as essential in catchment wide flood
water management. Defra’s initially positive
approach to SuDS has been increasingly
weakened over the last four years by
Government’s concerns about putting the
brakes on house building, culminating in
the change of approach to a planning based
system through DCLG.; a scheme, which
during its consultation saw all the built
environment institutions in opposition to
the proposals. Many SuDS are called bluegreen infrastructure, which mimics natural
storage and attenuation processes with
features like ponds, swales and wetlands.
Though this needs to be in conjunction with
Section 1:
The Inquiry
1.1
the Inquiry
hardAbout
traditional
flood defences we were told
The
of climate
change
and this
it is agrowth
more cost
effective
approach;
urbanisation
is expected
to result
in greater
is supported by
Defra’s own
cost-benefit
risk
of flooding
in the UK if
inconsidered
the 21st Century.
assessments,
particularly
at the
How
threat is one of the biggest
outsetwe
intackle
spatialthe
planning.
challenges
by society.
This,and
theothers
third
Evidencefaced
presented
by CIRIA
Inquiry
of Therepeatedly
All Party Parliamentary
to the Inquiry
demonstratedGroup
that
for
Excellence
in theadditional
Built Environment,
SuDS
provide many
benefits to
looks
at the problems
to the UK
communities
over andcaused
above simply
theby
flooding
examines
theas
potential
for
control ofand
flood
risk, such
enriching
greater
mitigationand
of these
problems
and
the environment
absorbing
common
significantly
improvingpiped
flood drainage
resilience
pollutants. Traditional
including
the potential
for adaptation
systems, shown
to typically
cost more to
than
changing
environmental
We very
the equivalent
SuDS frompressures.
Defra’s own
much
seelack
ourthese
findings
as theonly
beginning
studies,
benefits,
servingoftoa
dialogue
with a water
new Government.
convey surface
runoff rapidly away
This
report
is rain
the result
from
where
the
falls of an open Inquiry
into
flood mitigation
resilience.
However,
SuDS are and
onlyfuture
practical
if
As
such
appropriate
organisations
dealing
there
is aall
robust
mechanism
for ensuring
with
the impacts
flooding,
flood defence,
responsibility
forof
their
long term
mitigation
and
resilience
wereongoing
invited to
management
and
guaranteed
submit
and oral But
supplementation
fundingevidence,
for maintenance.
establishing
was
requested
from
a number
of them. The
a way
forward has
proved
problematic.
In itsand
callWater
for evidence,
the Commission
Flood
Management
Act 2010
was
particularly
for practical
set out
plans forlooking
SuDS implementation,
strategies
thatand
would,
for example,
improve
maintenance
adoption
in Schedule
3
flood
adaptation
andafter
mitigation,
of theprotection,
Act. However,
four years
its
as
well as enable
better
assessment
of
introduction,
theaissue
has
still not been
flood
risk and aThe
consequent
improvement
fully resolved.
neat solution
originallyin
insurance
and
valuation
issues. up of localput forward
was
for the setting
The weight of evidence
weSuDS
received
authority-backed
bodies –
Approval
focussed
on the
needdraw
for long-term
water
bodies. These
would
up standards
and
management
and enforced
the means
of be
providing
a
ensure they were
and
responsible
sustainable
and
affordable strategy
for long-term
maintenance.
Instead,to deal
with
the impacts
climate
change – in
Government
will of
drive
the implementation
essence
movingofaway
from
defence to
of the delivery
SuDS
onlyflood
through
one
of ‘Living with
water’
. Thatplanning
was perhaps
encouragement
in the
normal
hardly
surprising given the timing and back
process.
drop
toisthe
Inquiry. Evidence
was taken
at a
So it
disappointing
that there
will no
time
when
Government’s
approach
to the
longer
be a the
requirement
for SuDS
Approval
adoption
of Sustainable
Drainage
Systems
bodies, which
would have
lifted many
of
was
very much
a key plank of the
the barriers
to implementation
as‘Living
they with
water’
the adoption
of SuDS
would concept
have putbut
in place
arrangements
for
was
uncertain and was creating widespread
maintenance.
concern
amongst professionals
in the built
We understand
why the Government
environment.
Thisto
has
meant
that inthe
the
should be anxious
avoid
applying
time
wetohave
had building
available,sector
given the
looming
brakes
a house
which
election,
our scrutiny
of approaches
is not
is now seeing
the industry
recover from
comprehensive
andon
dorecord.
not specifically
its lowest outputs
Housing deal
with
coastaland
andaffordability
ground water
and
availability
is flooding
one of the
defences.
defining issues of the post-2008 crash in the
What
has come
UK
political
scene.over unequivocally was
the
risks
doare
with
water that
exceedance
and
Even
so,towe
worried
the latest
shortages
likelyup
to problems
increase infor
proposals are
willmost
also store
severity
asby
a result
of climate
change,
yet
the future
allowing
developers
to retain
the information
presented
to us
was one of
right to connect
to public
sewers,
confused
policy
and missed
opportunity,
thus further
overloading
drains,
as well as
despite
evidence.
allowingclear
sitesscientific
with fewer
than ten homes to
Hence,
this
report also
stresses the
avoid
SuDS
measures
altogether.
need
for remains
the integration
flood water
There
no one of
responsible
body for
management,
as we
move from of
anSuDS.
approach
the adoption and
maintenance
This
based
on to
flood
to one
flood
will lead
the defences
continuation
of of
confusion,
resilience,
and a more
holistic and
with the effective
management
of integrated
surface
approach
to water
generally.
water using
SuDS management
gradually becoming
the
Written
was submitted
theas
norm
onlyevidence
over a lengthy
period of in
time
Autumn
of 2014,
and three
sessions,
it is the only
affordable
wayopen
to deal
with
where
was presented,
took
climateoral
andevidence
other societal
changes as
stated
place
during November
and December.
independently
by both Ofwat
and Defra.
The
APPG
fortoEBE
ofclear
There
needs
be aCommission
definitive and
Inquiry
comprises
members
ofmajor
both Houses
arrangement
that compels
the
of
Parliament,tosenior
members
the
stakeholders
co-operate.
Theofproposed
construction
professions
and key
planning based
regime is likely
to influencers
result
and
in other
aspects
in a decision
complex makers
and highly
variable
set ofof
society.
standards for surface water being applied
that will vary between planning authorities.
1.2
Members
of the
Commission
Some
authorities
may
“compete” to have
Oliver
Colvile MP
(chairman)
developments
in their
area by diluting the
George
need to Adams
manage surface water in the best way,
Peter
Aldous MP
for maximum
community benefit. This is
Professor
potentiallyRichard
a recipeAshley
for chaos and as planning
Peter
Bonfield
OBE do not correspond with
authority
boundaries
Tony
Burton
drainage
catchment boundaries, a recipe for
Sue
poorIllman
control of flooding within catchments.
The
Earl forward
of Lyttonall(vice
chairman)points to
Going
the evidence
Jack
floodPringle
risk as getting worse and costing us
Rt
HonThe
Nick
Raynsford
(vicefor
chairman)
more.
alternative
isMP
paying
insurance
based on average annual damages that are up
1.3
Secretariat
to six
times the cost of fixing the problem.
Graham
Watts
OBE are to be financed is a
How flood
defences
Denise
Chevin (rapporteur
and report
very significant
challenge. Funding
forauthor)
capital
Tamara
projectsDale
and maintenance of assets, both
hard and soft, is likely to remain an issue in
the foreseeable future. Yet despite these ever
increasing challenges flood resilience and
water management still remains something
of a Cinderella issue at the highest political
9
33
Living with water
34
6
level,
whereas
its importance
no less
than
●
Climate
change
means thatis
surface
water
thatwill
of transport
andcommonplace
power infrastructure.
become more
in future
That
said,need
water
emotivecarefully
subject to
and will
tois
bean
managed
because
the misery
And
avoidof
having
to keepflooding
buildingcauses.
new drainage
we capacity
have theat
spectre
at unaffordable
times of management
vast and
expense.
on the
hoof,the
with
money
going
those
Instead,
public
should
be to
encouraged
communities
shout
thepuddles’
loudestor
– as
and in
to see suchthat
events
as ‘big
theharmless
case of the
Somerset
with money
water
flowingLevels,
along gutters
and
being
spent
on‘exceedance
media-driven
mitigation
kerbs.
This
drainage’
should
measures
like dredging
which experts
be recognised
as an acceptable
way oftold
us can
do more
harm
good inproviding
the long
managing
water
onthan
the surface,
term.
it is done in such a way as to avoid
Ifunacceptable
we are to properly
prepare for what
problems.
climate
change throws
at defences
us, we need
●
The financing
of flood
andmore of
an honest,
open
and engagement
with
resilience
is a debate
very significant
challenge.
theFunding
public, both
to educate
households
and
for capital
projects
and
communities
into
they
canhard
build
maintenance
of how
assets,
both
andwater
soft is
resilience
theiranproperties,
also to
likely tointo
remain
issue in thebut
foreseeable
further
understanding
discussion
ofin
future.
Annual floodand
damage
costs are
what
of water
is acceptable,
thelevel
region
of £1.1exceedance
billion and could
rise by
in areas
suchasas
roads.
as much
£27
billion by 2080 according
Professionals
must play
theirItpart
to the Environment
Agency.
has too
been
in greater
collaboration
and knowledge
estimated
that maintaining
existing levels
sharing
to aid
improved
of flood
defence
wouldcommunication
require flood and
integrated
management
and
defencewater
spending
to increasetotocreate
over £1
support
billionmultifunctional,
a year by 2035. multi-beneficial
andW
sustainable
places. in the UK is
●
ater management
complicated by the fact we have what has
Recommendations
been described as ‘the most disconnected
Wewater
wouldmanagement
urge an incoming
Government
to.
system
in the world’
consider
the following
proposals
it continues
Too many
organisations
haveas
responsibility
to tackle
the potentially
devastating
impact
of
for aspects
of water and
drainage,
and they
flooding
which
only likelyto
toco-operate
worsen in the
are under
noisobligation
even
future
in the
of climate
change.
where
it iswake
essential
to deliver
resilience.
● In addition, the ownership of assets is
●diffuse.
Strong leadership:
Government
needs
Statutory flood
risk management
to foster clear
leadershipintroduced
on water issues
strategies
- an obligation
under
andFlood
appoint
Cabinet
champion to
set- in
the
andaWater
Management
Act
train yet
a longer
term visionby
for
delivering
have
to be introduced
many
Lead
a co-ordinated
long termwe
flood
water
Local
Flood Authorities,
haveand
been
told.
management
strategySystems
and it must
ring● S
ustainable Drainage
(SuDS)
– or
fence infrastructure,
funding to do so.
green
such as ponds, swales
●and
Strategic
land review:
water
vegetation,
are a keyThis
part new
of water
champion should
instigate
a review
management
strategy,
and work
alongside
of land use policy,
placing
andmany
proprietary
SuDS. SuDs
canwater
provide
climate change
alongside
a range ofover
other
additional
benefits
to communities
emerging
a multi-functional
and
above priorities
simply thefor
control
of flood risk,
landscape.
such
as enriching the environment and
●P
ublic debate:
There
needs toTraditional
be clarity
absorbing
common
pollutants.
on
what
level ofsystems,
disruption
the typically,
country
piped
drainage
shown,
finds
a result
of water
to costacceptable
more thanasthe
equivalent
of SuDS
exceedance.
Atstudies,
the moment
therebenefits,
are
in Defra’s own
lack these
differing
standards
around
thewater
country.
only serving
to convey
surface
runoff
●L
earning
to live
water:
We falls.
need a
rapidly
away
fromwith
where
the rain
programme
inform
and
● high
SuDSprofile
are only
practical ifto
there
is a robust
educate
the for
public
on theresponsibility
importance
mechanism
ensuring
of
homes
resistant and
formaking
their long
termflood
management
resilient
and managing
and guaranteed
ongoingexpectations
funding
about
water and living
it.
for maintenance.
We arewith
extremely
●More
cash forthat
maintenance:
disappointed
Schedule 3 ofThere
The Flood
needs
to beManagement
even stronger
emphasis
on
and Water
Act
2010, which
maintenance
funding
ensure that
set out plans for
SuDSto
implementation,
existing
floodand
protection
assets
maintenance
adoption,
is notare
being
sustained.
implemented despite extensive backing
●R
etrofitting
for resilience:
from
professionals
and localGovernment
authorities.
should
undertake
an investment
Particularly
disappointing
is the dropping
programme
to retrofit
towns and cities
of plans for local
authority-backed
to
make–them
resilient,
as an
bodies
SuDSmore
Approval
bodies.
These
additional
of theirand
flood
defence
would drawaspect
up standards
ensure
they
spending.
Seeking
through
were enforced,
and synergies
would be responsible
every
aspect ofmaintenance.
regenerationInstead,
and ongoing
for long-term
maintenance
programmes
and by working
Government will
drive the implementation
with
relevant
(highways,
of theall
delivery
ofstakeholders
SuDS only through
water
companies)
also make
encouragement
in will
the normal
planning
retrofitting
more cost effective.
process.
●
etter
design standards:
Everywhere
● B
W
e understand
why Government
should
in
country
is inapplying
a water catchment
bethis
anxious
to avoid
the brakes
so
needbuilding
to reduce
water
runoff
from
to awe
house
sector
which
is now
every
whether
new
or existing
seeingbuilding,
the industry
recover
from
its lowest
–
helpedon
with
newHousing
Buildingavailability
Regulations
outputs
record.
and
for
designingisfor
flood
resistance
and
affordability
one
of the
defining issues
resilience.
of the post-2008 crash in the UK political
●U
sing insurance
toare
incentivise
scene.
However, we
worried that the
resilience:
The insurance
industry
needs
latest proposals
will also store
up problems
to
how it can
incentivise
forgive
the thought
future byto
allowing
developers
to
improving
floodtoresilience
ofpublic
properties,
retain the right
connect to
sewers,
rather
than simply
reinstating
thus further
overloading
drains,structures
as well as
to
inadequate
pre-flooding
standards.
allowing
sites with
fewer than
ten homes to
●U
singSuDS
Floodmeasures
Re insurance
to promote
avoid
altogether.
The
Flood
Re scheme
● resilience:
As it is, there
now
remains
no onedue to
be
introduced
in the
summer
should
responsible
body
for the
adoption
andbe
used
to drive of
a step
change
in households’
maintenance
SuDS.
This will
lead to
protection
and resilience
and we
the continuation
of confusion
and with no
recommend
those
measures setsolution
out by to
obvious short
or medium-term
the Sub-Committee
on Adaptation
effective management
of surface to
water
make
happen should be adopted.
using this
SuDS.
Recommendations
● Considering the most vulnerable:
WeGovernment
would urge an
incoming
Government
needs
to consider
how we
to consider
the following
proposals,
as
protect those
who cannot
afford flood
it continues
tackle the potentially
insurance,toparticularly
those living in
devastating
of flooding,
which is only
tenantedimpact
properties.
Local authorities
likely
the future
the wake of
cantonoworsen
longerin
provide
suchin
discretionary
climate
change.
funding.
● S
trong
leadership: Promote
Government
needs
built
environment:
greater
to
foster clear leadership
on water
issues
co-ordination
of professionals
through
and
appoint
a Cabinet
champion
to set
a new
CIC grouping
which
could act
as ain
train
a longer
term
visionwhich
for delivering
sounding
board
through
to channel
aflooding
co-ordinated
policy.long term flood and water
management strategy and it must ringfence
funding
to do so.
SuDS
and
maintenance
● S
trategic
This new
We
believeland
the review:
greater uptake
of water
champion
should
instigate
a review
Sustainable
Drainage
Systems
is vital and
of
land
policy, placing
water and
that
theuse
Government
is mistaken
in not
climate
changeSchedule
alongside3ainrange
of other
implementing
the Flood
and
emerging
priorities for
multi-functional
Water Management
Acta 2010
and instead
landscape.
relying on the planning system. Schedule
● Public
There needs
clarity
3 woulddebate:
have ensured
the usetoofbeSuDS
on
on
whatdevelopments
level of disruption
theup
country
all new
and set
SuDS
finds
a result
of waterclarity
Floodsacceptable
Approval as
Bodies
to provide
exceedance.
At the moment
there are
over their management
and maintenance
differing
standards around the country.
and standards.
● Learning to live with water: We need a
profile
programme
to inform andnow
As high
a result
of this
U-turn, Government
educate
the public
on theasimportance
needs
to resolve
as quickly
possible more
of making
homes
flood resistant and
detailed
proposals
for:
and managing
expectations
● resilient
SuDS maintenance:
Ensuring
long
about
water and living
it. for
term management
and with
funding
● M
ore cash forwhich
maintenance:
There
maintenance,
is absolutely
critical
needs
be even stronger
emphasis
if this to
blue-green
infrastructure
is not
on
maintenance
funding
to ensure
that
to fail.
We suggest
that those
homes
and
existing
flood
protection
are
businesses
‘connected’
to assets
SuDS could
sustained.
be charged directly for the maintenance
● R
etrofitting
resilience:
Government
like
a charge for
from
a water company.
should
undertake
an on
investment
The charge
could be
local authority
programme
to retrofit
towns
andtocities
rates and what
is currently
paid
water
to
make them
resilient,
as an be
companies
formore
surface
water should
additional
aspect ofastheir
flood
defence
gradually removed
SuDS
are installed,
spending.
synergies
through
unless it isSeeking
the water
companies
which
every
aspect
of regeneration
provide
the SuDS
service. and ongoing
programmes
and
by working
● maintenance
Reducing loading
on public
sewers:
with
all relevant
stakeholders
Removing
the automatic
right(highways,
to connect
water
companies)
will
make sewers
rainwater
discharge
to also
the public
retrofitting
cost effective.
as originallymore
specified
under the FWMA
● Better
2010. Many
design
of standards:
these publicEverywhere
sewers,
in
this were
country
inVictorian
a water catchment
which
builtisin
times are
so
we need to reduce water runoff from
overloaded.
whether new Ensuring
or existing
● every
SuDSbuilding,
–
helped
withofnew
Building
Regulations
that
the limit
‘fewer
than 10
houses’
for designing
flood resistance
SuDS to befor
included
is changedand
back
resilience.
to two (to avoid a profusion of planning
● U
sing insurance
to incentivise
applications
for nine
houses). As SuDS
resilience:
The insurancethrough
industry
needs
have been demonstrated
Defra’s
to
give
thought
it canparticularly
incentivise
own
research
to to
behow
cheaper,
improving
flood resilience
properties,
where integrated
within theofscheme
rather
than
simply
reinstating structures
from its
original
masterplanning,
the
to
inadequate
standards. reason
for the pre-flooding
threshold as ‘keeping
the
● Using
Flood
Re insurance
to companies
promote
regulatory
burden
on smaller
resilience:
Thelevel’
FloodisRe
scheme, due
at a reasonable
erroneous.
be introduced
in the
summer
2015,
● to
National
standards
needed:
Detailing
should
be used
to drive
a step
change
how it can
be ensured
that
SuDS
are in
households’
and resilience
designed to aprotection
set of national
standardsand
we
recommend
those
set out
as part
of the basis
formeasures
new planning
by
the Sub-Committee on Adaptation to
guidance.
this happen
should
be adopted.
● make
Resolving
adoption
of SuDS:
Defining
● C
the most
vulnerable:
a onsidering
clear procedure
and any
associated
Government
needs to consider
how the
costs for the adoption
of sites under
we
protectplanning-based
those who cannot
afford
proposed
system,
as the
flood
particularly
those
lack ofinsurance,
such a process
has historically
living
in tenanted
properties.
been the
greatest limitation
toLocal
the uptake
authorities
of SuDS. can no longer provide such
discretionary funding.
built environment: Promote greater
co-ordination of professionals through
a new Construction Industry Council
grouping which could act as a sounding
board through which to channel
flooding policy.
SuDS and maintenance
● We believe the greater uptake of
Sustainable Drainage Systems is vital and
that the Government is mistaken in not
implementing Schedule 3 in the Flood
and Water Management Act 2010 and
instead relying on the planning system.
Schedule 3 would have ensured the use
of SuDS on all new developments and
set up SuDS Floods Approval Bodies to
provide clarity over their management
and maintenance and standards.
7
35
Living with water
List of witnesses
Chairman’s
who gave oral evidence
foreword
An increasing need for more houses, more dramatic
Stuart Ryder
Paul Shaffer
storms
and
fl
oods,
as
well
as
a
signifi
cant
changes to our
Landscape Institute
CIRIA
environment, are having a significant impact on local
Robert Barker and peoples’ everyday lives.
David Schofield
communities
36
4
RIBA
Hydro Consultancy
Each
these seasonal “acts of god” are
increasingly
David year
Edwards
Espen
Østbye-Strøm
Shropshire
County
Council
Justin
Meredith
dominating our television screens and are having a sigFloodline Developments
Oliver Colvile MP nificant impact on local economies.
Chairman of the
All Party
Parliamentary Group
for Excellence in the
Built Environment
Simon Watkins
Julian Jones (Water 21)
Brian Rodgers
Probably
theCharlesworth
most dramatic pictures over
the last
fifteen
Professor Sue
Andrew
Wescott
(Centre
for
Agroecology
Institution
of
Civil Engineers
years were last year’s scenes of the railway line at DawlWater and Resilience Coventry University)
ish, the flooding on the Somerset Levels and Tewkesbury
Watkins Design Associates
Dr David Kelly
in 2007 and 2012 as well as the torrent of
water that
Professor
Dorte-Rich Jorgensen
Bronwyn
Buntine
Royal
Academy
of Engineering’s Centre of
decimated Boscastle in 2004.
Max Tant
Excellence in Sustainable Building Design at
Kent County Council
Herriot Watt University
Last autumn, the All Party Parliamentary Group for the
Built
Environment – of which I am the Chairman
– conWill McBain
Philip Wilbourn
Dr
Faye
Beaman
Alan
Cripps
ducted a public inquiry, with three public sessions, into
Arup
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
delivering
future flood resilience.
Stephen Garvin
Building
Research taking
Establishment
This
included
evidence from the industry, various
Government agencies, local authorities and the development industry. Disappointingly the Environment Agency
failed to appear before us or failed to provide us with any
written evidence.
This report seeks to set out the challenges facing local
communities, calls on both national and local government to demonstrate a greater sense of leadership and
recommends a strategy which can help provide some
practical answers to these challenges.
Executive
List of all written
summary
submissions
This
Arup report is the result of an open Inquiry
into flood mitigation and future resilience.
As
such,plc
all appropriate organisations
Augean
dealing with these issues were invited to
submit
and oral supplementation
Buildingevidence,
Research Establishment
was requested from a number of them. The
weight
CIRIA of evidence we received focussed on
the need for long-term water management
and
the means
of providing a sustainable
Floodline
Developments
and affordable approach for dealing with
the
impacts
of climate change – in essence
Hydro
Consultancy
‘Living with water’. That focus was perhaps
unsurprising,
given
the timing and backdrop
Institution of Civil
Engineers
to the Inquiry. Evidence was taken at a
time
when the
Government approach
Kent County
Council
to the adoption of Sustainable Drainage
Systems
was subject
to Control
uncertainty, creating
Local Authority
Building
widespread concern amongst professionals
in
the builtInstitute
environment. This has meant
Landscape
that in the restricted time we have had
available,
given the looming election, our
F P McCann
scrutiny of the approaches to do specifically
with
Robertcoastal
Mann and ground water flooding and
defence, has been limited in scope. However,
we
this Inquiry
very much as the start
Thesee
Prince’s
Foundation
of the conversation on flood resilience and
mitigation
withofaEngineering
future Government.
Royal Academy
Centre of
Excellence in Sustainable Building design at
Our
report says:
Heriot-Watt
University
● Despite the ever increasing challenges,
flood
resilience
and water
management
Royal
Institute
of British
Architects
still remains a Cinderella issue at
theInstitution
highest political
level, Surveyors
though its
Royal
of Chartered
importance is no less than that of
transport
and power infrastructure and
Shropshire
Council
needs to be given the same priority as
High Design
Speed 2.
Failure to take the issue of
Watkins
Associates
comprehensive water management much
more seriously will have severe economic
impacts on UK plc.
● All of our critical national infrastructure,
including water supply and our drainage
network, is under threat from climate
change which poses both societal and
economic disruption.
● Flooding is not a singular or isolated
event. It affects many aspects of society
and it carries economic risks that will
●
●
●
●
●
●
increase as climate change marches on. As
the associated risks to business increases
under a minimalistic national plan, then
the threat of them locating outside the
UK becomes more likely.
There appears to be no Government
leadership, and no one single department
as a whole or for flooding across all of the
As a consequence we are missing an
opportunity to put in place a sustainable
long-term strategy for water management.
The strategy must protect homes against
the increased flooding we are likely to see
in the wake of climate change and greater
urbanisation, while at the same time
protecting against increased water scarcity
caused by drought.
Flood risk is set to increase – the
Environment Agency says 5.2 million
properties are at risk of flooding, which is
nearly one in six. Of these, 3.8 million are
at risk from surface water flooding, which
can be the most difficult to deal with.
If we are to tackle this increasing problem
we need a fundamental change in how
we view flood management, from the
current position of being all about flood
defence to one of resilience, which means
making space for water and getting ‘morefrom-less’ by seeing all forms of water as
providing multiple benefits.
Professionals must play their part, too,
in greater collaboration and knowledge
sharing, to aid improved communication
and integrated water management, so as
to create and support multifunctional,
multi-beneficial and sustainable places.
If we are to properly prepare for what
climate change throws at us, we need an
honest, open debate and engagement with
the public, both to educate households
and communities in how they can build
water resilience into their properties,
but also to agree what level of water
exceedance is acceptable.
5
37
Living with water
Report from the Commission of Inquiry into flood
flood resilience of the future
Contents
38
4 Chairman’s foreword
5 Executive summary and recommendations
9
Section 1:
The Inquiry
• 1.1 About the Inquiry
• 1.2 Members of the Commission
• 1.3 Secretariat
10Section 2:
• 2.1 Scale of the problem
• 2.2 Sources of flooding
• 2.3 Recent improvements and changes by Government
• 2.4 The complicated governance of water management
17 Section 3:
Opportunities and barriers to increasing flood resilience • 3.1 Government spending on flood mitigation measures
• 3.2 Flooding and planning
• 3.3 Surface water, SuDs and Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water
Management Act
• 3.4 Retrofitting SuDS
• 3.5 Lack of coherent technical standards
• 3.6 Flood mapping and better data
• 3.7 Insurance issues
32 Section 4:
Concluding remarks and recommendations
36List of witnesses who gave oral evidence
37 List of all written submissions
3 39
All Party Group for Excellence in the Built Environment
HOUSE OF COMMONS
LONDON SW1A 0AA

Living with water - Construction Industry Council

Transcription

Similar documents

What you have told us

LPRCA Factsheet - Long Point Region Conservation Authority

Floodwatch®

p - Garden Commerical Properties

Flood Risk Factsheet – Fox and Hound

excess flood faq

STORMREADY_CUBS_3646_FALL2014_inside