Transcript The Don Catchment Alliance

Integrating water management and spatial
planning
Developments in England (and elsewhere)
UK Context
• April 2004 – Foresight Future Flooding report Published
• July 2004 – making Space for Water programme initiated
• July 2004 – Com (2004) 472 Final, Flood risk management,
Flood prevention, protection and mitigation
• June and July 2007 – Major floods in many areas of England
• October 2007 – Directive 1007/60/EC on the assessment and
management of flood risks
• Pitt Review final report published 25th June 2008
• November 2009 – Flood and Water Management Bill
published
• December 2009 - Flood Risk Regulations published
• April 2010 - Flood and Water Management passed
•
•
•
•
•
•
What’s climate change about
and how will it affect our
cities?
More intense rainfall?
Longer duration heavy rainfall?
More frequent intense and long duration rainfall?
Is it just more of what we already get?
It’s also about heat island, and pressure on water supply.
And there are other things to consider
– Increasing population and demographic change
– What is the impact of declining oil reserves and increasing
competition for what’s left
– What about food security and the demand for irrigation against those
for urban water supply?
• What are our cities going to look like in the future?
A vision of what might
happen if we just carry on as
normal
• River Aire Strategic Studies
ECCLESHILL & GREENGATES
RAWDON
HORSFORTH
KEIGHLEY LOW LEVEL
SUTTON IN CRAVEN
MEANWOOD
YEADON
GIPTON
BINGLEY
Baildon
KEIGHLEY HIGH LEVEL
HARDEN VALLEY
SHIPLEY
RODLEY
WYKEBECK
HEATON & FRIZINGHALL
MANNINGHAM
WORTLEY
MIDDLETON
THORNTON VALLEY
HORTON VALLEY
MORLEY
LITTLE HORTON
PUDSEY
MANCHESTER RD/BOWLING
SMALEWELL
CITY CENTRE/WTS
EAST BRADFORD
50 Km
Aire study objectives
• To review available data and identify additional data needs.
• To review the pressures for land use change from regional
spatial strategy and specific regeneration initiatives and
quantify the likely impacts on all forms of surface water
management systems at a local scale.
• To assess current and future flood risk and water quality
impacts resulting from land use and climate changes at
strategic level for the River Aire catchment in Bradford and
Leeds and at local level for selected locations.
Impact of climate change,
development and creep
Impact of climate change, development, creep and event probability on surface flow volume
35000
Surface flow volume (c.m.)
30000
25000
2005
20000
2025
2055
15000
2085
10000
5000
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Event probability (1 in (x) years)
70
80
90
100
Conclusions
• Flooding
– Increase in the number of vulnerable locations by approximately 40%
– Increase in the surface water flow volume by around 100%
– Increase in the frequency of surface water flooding at vulnerable
locations by around 200%
• Water quality
– Typical discharge volumes to receiving waters may increase by at least
60%
– Typical biochemical oxygen demand loads may increase by around
50%
– Typical suspended solids loads may increase by over 120%
• Can we afford not to do anything?
If climate change means more
water in our cities, what do
we want to do?
• Do we want to spend a fortune and bring our cities to a
standstill by increasing the size of our sewers?
• Do we want to manage the occasional excess water on the
surface at minimum cost through appropriate urban design?
• Anyone who prefers increasing the size of our sewers can go
straight to the asylum now.
• That doesn’t mean that we abandon our sewers, they are a
really valuable asset. For more than a century they have been
proved to be really sustainable. However we need to use
them to their maximum benefit.
• Are we agreed that this is what we want to do?
• If not we need to talk and work out our differences!
But what can we
do?
• This is what is likely to
happen and what we
have to do
• Threshold of
acceptability is the
same as Tipping Point
Increasing flood risk
Structured development
Threshold of acceptability
Climate change
Unstructured development
T1
T2
Drainage infrastructure
enhancements
Management of the
urban surface
Socio economic
adaptation
(Densification, retreat
reduced expectations etc)
Reducing flood risk
Planning horizon
Time
Identify current and potential future risks, and
who is responsible for managing them
Water type
Water category
Exceedence pathways
Surface water and
soil
Rural and urban
areas
Groundwater
Drainage
infrastructure
Small Stream2
Streams and
ponds
Large Stream3
Ponds
sub category
Rural green space
Green space at urban fringe
Green space within urban area
Developed urban surface
Artificial superficial deposits(Made, Worked, In filled, Disturbed or Landscaped
Ground)
Natural superficial deposits
Bedrock
Combined sewer
Surface water sewer
Foul sewer
SUDS/Source control
Pipe drain
Open Drain
Open
Piped/culverted
Built over
Open
Piped/culverted
Built over
Ponds with outlets
Ponds without outlets
River1
Rivers and lakes
Artificial water
bodies
Coastal
Lakes
Drainage channel
Canal
Reservoirs
Estuaries and deltas
Open sea
Lakes with outlets
Lakes without outlets (oxbow)
Salt lakes (inland seas)
Adopt a task and role
orientated approach
• This focuses on doing the job of flood risk management.
• Driven by practitioner needs.
• It’s more common to start from the position of legislation and
institutions, but tends to omit whole areas of flood risk
management as the law doesn’t cover everything.
• By looking at it from doing the job, duties, powers, voluntary
action and areas of inaction can be identified.
What is the task?
• Section 2.2 COM (2004) 472 final provides guidance on
management the risk of floods as follows:
– Prevention: preventing damage caused by floods by avoiding construction of
houses and industries in present and future flood-prone areas; by adapting
future developments to the risk of flooding; and by promoting appropriate
land-use, agricultural and forestry practices;
– Protection: taking measures, both structural and non-structural, to reduce
the likelihood of floods and/or the impact of floods in a specific location;
– Preparedness: informing the population about flood risks and what to do in
the event of a flood;
– Emergency response: developing emergency response plans in the case of a
flood;
– Recovery and lessons learned: returning to normal conditions as soon as
possible and mitigating both the social and economic impacts on the
affected population”.
This is often represented as
follows
But the task is neither cyclical or
sequential
• Things happen at the same time, they can intertwine and synergies can be
developed
Awareness
Analysis and assessment
Alleviation and avoidance
Assistance
Recovery
Preparation
Inter event period with minor events
Warning
All clear
Response
Recovery
Significant
event
Time
So who is involved?
Discipline
Water
type
Water category
sub category
Exceedence pathways
Rural green space
Green space at urban fringe
Surface water
and soil
Green space within urban area
Rural and
Developed urban surface
urban
Artificial superficial deposits
areas
Groundwater
Natural superficial deposits
Bedrock
Sewers
Drainage
SUDS/Source control
infrastructure
Drains
Small Stream2
Streams
Large Stream3
and ponds
Ponds
Rivers and River1
lakes
Lakes
Artificial
Drainage channel
water
Canal
bodies
Reservoirs
Estuaries and deltas
Coastal
Open sea
Water
specialists
Planning
and
building
control
specialists
Highway
specialists
Administrator,
Landscape financial and
specialists
legal
specialists
Stakeholder analysis, who does what?
• Identify the organisations that are involved and the tasks they
carry out
– Awareness raising (including lessons learned)
– Analysis and assessment (identifying flood hazards and risk)
– Avoidance and Alleviation (actions to prevent and protect from
flooding)
– Assistance (preparing for, responding to and helping recover from
floods).
• Then identify who does what within organisations
• Identify if actions are legal duties, legal powers, viluntary and
also where there are no actions.
• Agree who should do what
• Write it all down and formalise it. Don’t just carry it round in
your head. Get it clear and get it right
This enables
• Communication pathways within and between organisations
to be identified.
• The need for the development of competencies to be
identified.
• The need for capacity building to be identified.
– Tools (software)
– Procedures
– Organisational infrastructure (for communication and information
sharing)
– Etc.
• In effect an emerging strategy for flood risk management
Where are we?
• In England legislation has created a duty to produce local flood risk
management strategies.
• The top down guidance is being produced by administrators rather
then practitioners. Therefore, although the intentions are good,
there are shortcomings.
• Aware that this was likely to happen, the UoS and Bradford
involvement in projects such as SKINT, MARE and FRC provides the
opportunity to identify the gaps and how to fill them.
• The methods are being tried and tested by different project
partners, e.g. Bradford worked on an earlier version and Hannover
started the process last week and have identified what they do now
• This is an ongoing process that will be completed in the next two
years and all are welcome to join in.
Hannover analysis
• Tables 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, are check lists for the different topic
groups relevant to flood risk management. The stakeholders
responsible for each cell within the table should be identified
together with an assessment of whether the stakeholder is
acting because of legislative duties, legislative powers, or
voluntarily. Each cell may be completed by entering a unique
number for each stakeholder followed by a letter as follows:
• D for a duty set down in statute
• P for a power set down in statute
• V for a voluntary action
• Therefore cells may be completed 1P, 4V etc.
• Some of the tasks are either not relevant to some of the water
types and some are not possible to do.
• Table 6 identifies the stakeholders and their roles
Table 6, stakeholder reference
numbers and their roles
Interest
Initiators
Road/Transport
Building control
Development
control
Strategy planners
Emergency
plannning
Water quantity
Create state of the
art knowledge
knowledge
maintenance
Knowledge
development
Planning bodies
Water quality
Environment
Heritage
Wild life
Long term ownership
Stakeholder
Developers
Regulators
A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D A D
Public Authorities
1. City of Hannover
2. Region Hannover
3. , Ministry
4. Federal State Lower Saxony, NLWKN (EA)
5.
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x
x x
x x
x x
x
x x x x
x
x x x
x x x x
x
x
x x x
x x x x
x
x x x x x x x
x x x x
x x x x
x x x x
x
x
x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x
x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
x
x
x
x
x
x x x x x x x
x
x
6. citizens, organisations and communities
e.g. University of Hannover
7. interest groups
8. Knowledge institutions
e.g. University of Hannover
x x x x x
x
x
x
x
x x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Table 1
1v 1v 1v 1v 1v
5d
4v
1v 1v 1v 1v 1v
4v
4v 4v
5d
4d
5d
4d
5d
4d
5d
4v 4v
5v
5v
5v
Flood forecasting
Hazard, probability and risk
Mapping joint probabilities
Open sea
Deltas
5d 1v
Economic damage assessment
Mapping
Reservoirs
Canals
1v 1v 1v 1v 1v 4d 4d
1v,
4d 4d,
Estuaries
Artificial
water bodies
Drainage channels
Rivers and lakes
Large Streams and ponds
Open Drain
Modelling
Incident data
Rainfall
Probability and consequences (risk)
Modelling joint probabilities
Small Streams and ponds
1v
Pipe drain
Flow and depth
SUDS/Source control
Data collection and management
Sewers
Rainfall
Drainage
infrastructure
Bedrock
Natural superficial deposits
Artificial superficial deposits(Made,
Worked, In filled, Disturbed or
Landscaped Ground)
Developed urban surface
Green space within urban area
Green space at urban fringe
Groundwater
Rural green space
This table may be used to identify who does what modelling etc
Exceedence pathways
Table 1: Stakeholder involvement in flood analysis and assessment
Surface water and soil
Table 2
1v 1v
1v 1v
1v 4d
Open sea
Deltas
1v 1v
1v
Estuaries
1v 1v
Reservoirs
1v
Canals
1v 1v 1v 1v
1v 1v 1v,
2v 2v 2v,
1v 1v 1v 1v 5v 5v 5v
Artificial water
bodies
Drainage channels
Rivers and lakes
Impact of climate change
Customising awareness raising material for
decision makers, professional advisors and
public
Pipe drain
SUDS/Source control
Sewers
5v 5v 5v
5v 5v 5v
Flood mechanisms and their interactions
Flood risk
Flood risk management
Impact of demographic change
Local flood history
Resilient construction
Resistant construction
Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS)
Controlled surface conveyance
Watercourse restoration
Traditional flood defence measures
Adapted Land Use
Residual risk
Insurance
Decision support tools
Communication
Education and guidance
Large Streams and ponds
Small Streams and ponds
Open Drain
Drainage
infrastructure
Bedrock
Artificial superficial deposits(Made,
Worked, In filled, Disturbed or
Landscaped Ground)
Natural superficial deposits
Groundwater
Developed urban surface
Surface water and soil
Green space within urban area
Green space at urban fringe
Rural green space
This table may be used twice:
 To identify the awareness raising that stakeholders believe
they should be providing
 To identify the awareness raising that they are doing
By taking one from the other the need to develop awareness
raising material can be identified.
Gaps will identify where material should be provided from
external sources.
Exceedence pathways
Table 2: Stakeholder involvement in raising flood awareness
Table 3
1v
1d
1d
1p
1v
1d
1d
1p
1v 1v 1v
3d 3d 3d
4p 4p 4p
Open sea
Deltas
1v
1d
1d
1p
Estuaries
1p 1p 1p 1p 1v 1v 1v
1p 1p 1p 1p
Reservoirs
Canals
1v 1v
1v
Artificial
water
bodies
Drainage channels
Rivers and lakes
Large Streams and ponds
Open Drain
Pipe drain
Regulation
Guidance
Regulation
Guidance
Regulation
Guidance
SUDS/Source control
Sewers
1v
Small Streams and ponds
Drainage
infrastructure
Bedrock
Natural superficial deposits
Zoning ordinances and maps
Water sensitive urban design
Surface water management
Surface water maintenance
Developing and assessing options
Appropriate use of adaptive and non adaptive
responses
Flood minimisation by flow management
Insurance
Reserve funds
FRM programme development
FRM programme implementation
Artificial superficial deposits(Made,
Worked, In filled, Disturbed or
Landscaped Ground)
Building control
Developed urban surface
Development control
Green space within urban area
Strategy and master planning
Green space at urban fringe
Resilient and resistant infrastructure
Resilient and resistant buildings (Flood
adaptive architecture)
Groundwater
Rural green space
This table may be used to identify the stakeholders involved in developing and
implementing appropriate measures for alleviating current flood risk and
avoiding future risk. Many, but not all flood risk management measures are
applicable to alleviation and avoidance so makes sense to merge the two.
These stakeholders should work closely with those identified in Table A2.4 to
manage flood risk
Exceedence pathways
Table 3: Stakeholder involvement in flood alleviation and avoidance
Surface water and soil
Table 4
1p
1d
1d
1d
1,
2,
3,
5
Open sea
Deltas
1,
2,
3,
5
1p
1d
1d
1d
1,
2,
3,
5
Estuaries
1p
1d
1d
1d
Reservoirs
Canals
Email
SMSOn-line
Door knocking
Temporary flood protection
Emergency operations
Artificial
water
bodies
Drainage channels
Rivers and lakes
Large Streams and ponds
Open Drain
Pipe drain
SUDS/Source control
Sewers
Small Streams and ponds
Drainage
infrastructure
Bedrock
Natural superficial deposits
Artificial superficial deposits(Made,
Worked, In filled, Disturbed or
Landscaped Ground)
Developed urban surface
Helping recovery
Green space within urban area
The “All clear” process
Green space at urban fringe
Responding to emergencies
Groundwater
1v 1v,
1v 4p 4p
Preparing for floods
Flood warnings
Surface water and soil
Rural green space
This table may be used to identify the stakeholders involved in assisting
communities to prepare for, manage and recover from flood events. These
stakeholders should work closely with those identified in Table 2.3 to manage
flood alleviation and avoidance. Because the stakeholders in this table assist
communities with all types of emergency and are very busy, all stakeholders in
the water and land management sector are advised to adopt a common
framework to ease communication and improve the effectiveness of
collaborative working.
Exceedence pathways
Table 4: Stakeholder involvement in assistance
Table 5
Integrating flood avoidance, alleviation and
assistance
Integration of spatial and emergency planning
Balancing structural and non structural responses by
assessment of impact on assistance
Assessment of needs
Capacity building
Innovation
Processes and tools
Training material
Assessment of needs
Identification of measures
1v, 1v,
4v 4v
1v, 1v,
4v 4v
1v 1v 1v 1v 1v 1v 1v
1v 1v 1v 1v 1v 1v 1v
1v,
2d,
3d,
4d,
5d
Open sea
Deltas
Integration of all aspects of land and water
management
5d
Estuaries
1v, 1v,
2d 2d,
3d 3d,
4d 4d,
5d
1v, 1v,
2d 2d,
4d 4d
1v 1v
Reservoirs
Canals
3d 3d, 3d, 3d, 3d, 3d, 3d 3d 3d,
5d 5d 5d 5d 5d 5d 5d 5d 5d
1v, 1v, 1v,
2d 2d 2d
Artificial
water
bodies
Drainage channels
Rivers and lakes
Large Streams and ponds
Open Drain
Small Streams and ponds
Pipe drain
SUDS/Source control
With communities and citizens
Communications systems
Sewers
Between organisations
Bedrock
Communication
Natural superficial deposits
3d, 5d
Within organisations
Drainage
infrastructure
Groundwater
Artificial superficial
deposits(Made, Worked, In
filled, Disturbed or Landscaped
Ground)
Developed urban surface
Regulation, procedures and institutional
arrangements
Embedding water into the culture and conscience
of the city.
Developing a coherent vision (consensus) for land
and water management
Green space within urban area
It is expected that each cell in this table will be relevant to several stakeholders. Once identified
these stakeholders can work together to develop appropriate approaches.
Surface water and
soil
Green space at urban fringe
Flood risk management is only one aspect of land and water management. It operates alongside
water quality management, water supply and drought management, land use and biodiversity
management. The civil contingency planning and emergency response sector also work across all
these different aspects of urban life. Consequently there are perceived benefits in developing a
common framework and language to ease communication and enhance effectiveness.
Rural green space
Exceedence pathways
Table 5: Stakeholder involvement in integration, strategy and capacity
Thank you for your attention