Presentation on theme: "SuDS Kerrie Ginns, Andrew Leadbetter & Paul Burrows Environment Agency July 2010."— Presentation transcript:
SuDS Kerrie Ginns, Andrew Leadbetter & Paul Burrows Environment Agency July 2010
Green Infrastructure and SuDS Green Infrastructure overview Why Green Infrastructure is important to the Environment Agency Green Infrastructure = SuDS Local flood risk, current policy and future challenges
What is Green Infrastructure? Green Infrastructure (GI) is a concept that describes a network of inter-connected, multifunctional green and blue spaces designed to meet the environmental, social and economic needs of a community.
Why is Green Infrastructure important for the Environment Agency? 1. GI is essential for sustainable development and for the delivery of sustainable communities. 2. We support the enhancement and increased development of well planned and managed GI networks. 3. New developments should include sufficient GI to support community and environmental needs. 4. Where appropriate and feasible, GI should be retrofitted into existing developments. 5. For maximum effect, GI should be strategically planned and managed.
Why is Green Infrastructure important for the Environment Agency? 6. Partnership working is essential for successful GI planning, development and management. 7. GI is an important and useful concept for the Environment Agency. 8. We should encourage the enhancement of blue spaces within all new and existing developments and we should recommend safeguarding floodplains from development by highlighting their multifunctional and flood storage benefits. 9. The coast and surrounding coastal environments are valuable components of GI networks. 10. GI has an important to play in responding to play in responding to climate change.
Essential for sustainable development Can be retrofitted into existing developments Plays an important role in responding to climate change
SuDS Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) are designed with three objectives in mind: to control the quantity and rate of run-off from a development; to improve the quality of the run-off; to enhance the nature conservation, landscape and amenity value of the site and its surroundings. SuDS deal with run-off as close to its source as possible and balance all three objectives, rather than focussing only on flood prevention.
Economic benefits of SuDS Experiences from UK, Europe and the US have shown that when properly planned and implemented, SuDS is no more expensive, if not cheaper than conventional drainage. For schemes where cost checks have been carried out, SuDS is nearly always cheaper to construct and maintain.
The savings accrued (both fiscal and social) are attributed to the following factors: - Absence of conventional kerbs and gullies - Reduced need for pipes, surface water sewers, manholes etc and absence of deep trench excavations - Absence of storage tanks, leading to reduced excavations and construction costs - Avoiding the need for pipe connections to distant outfalls - Avoiding the costs involved in routing pipes across land owned by others - Simpler construction - Reducing the economic and social cost of flooding - Limiting the risk of sewage discharge during exceptional high rainfall reduces risk to human health - Avoiding expensive connections to the local water authority. - Reducing maintenance costs
Local Flood Risk: current policy, future challenges
Properties at risk of flooding in England & Wales 23.8m properties not susceptible to flooding 5.5m properties at risk of flooding >1m properties at risk from river, coastal and surface water flooding >2.6m properties at risk of river and coastal flooding >3.9m properties at risk of surface water flooding
Flood and Water Management Act Impact on surface water Sections 1-6: LLFAs to manage local flood risk Sections 7-12: National and Local Strategies Sections 13-14: Duty to cooperate & power to share information Schedule 1: Third party assets
FWMA and sustainable drainage Schedule 3: Sustainable drainage Section 42: Automatic right to connect
Flood Risk Regulations - Timeline Dec 2009 Flood Risk Regulations 2009 201120132015 Preliminary Flood Risk Assessments published Dec 2011 Dec 2013 Flood Risk Areas - maps Flood Risk Areas - Management Plan 2015 Dec 2011 Flood Risk Areas identified Implementation
EA Strategic Overview objectives Outcome: Flood risk from all sources is adequately assessed and managed using a strategic, risk-based approach To be achieved by: continued delivery of flood risk management for main rivers and sea, and the oversight of reservoir safety significantly improved flood risk management for surface water, groundwater and ordinary watercourses
Local Flood Risk Roles Lead Local Flood Authority Lead delivery of local FRM Build partnerships SWMPs and SUDs Local Strategy Produce Flood Risk Regs assessment-map-plan Environment Agency Set the national framework Support LLFAs Guidance, data and tools Flood warning Implement relevant SWMP actions Quality Assurance RFCCs Role advising on quality and delivery
Local flood risk partnership LA (CC / UA) IDB Water Company Other local flood risk partners Highways Agency EA / RFCC LA (District) Delivery
Surface Water Management Plans (SWMPs) 5 x SWMPs Defra funded (by March 2011) Northampton, Ipswich, Norwich, Southend, Basildon/Wickford 1 x self funded Cambridgeshire (county wide – scoping only) 3 x successful early action bids Peterborough, Cambridge, Thurrock towns
Next steps Commencement of the FWM Act Establish and support Partnerships Clarity on Funding sources Delivery against Flood Risk Regulations Pursue the Strategic Overview and Localism
Discussion What progress is your Authority making in setting up partnerships, are planners linked into these? How well have the requirements of the Act and Regs been communicated within your Authority? What ideas have been discussed around implementation of your new roles in sustainable drainage?